I am using the "Tier System" outlined in court by Judge Peggy Leen reported in the Pahrump Valley Times December 16, 2016. Much confusion has resulted in publishing errors in print and media continue. I think it was by design to create infighting and making it hard to find the information regarding these cases.
Judge Gloria Navarro/DOJ "Throw It At The Wall Until It Sticks" Second Trial Of Tier 3 Defendants StandUp At Bunkerville
 |
| Judge Gloria Navarro "Throw It At The Wall Until It Sticks" Tier 3 Trial #2 |
When we last left you, the defendants in the Bundy-Bunkerville Protest Trial completed April 24, 2017. Shari Dovale reports the jury found former FBI Informant Greg Burleson guilty on 8 of 10 charges, with brandishing enhancements for the firearms charges.
Additionally, the jury found Todd Engel of Boundary County, Idaho, guilty of 2 of the charges against him.
But what about the main charges of Conspiracy?
Conspiracy to Commit an Offense Against the United States
Conspiracy to Impede or Injure a Federal Officer
Court documents were released that suggest the jury had unanimously found all defendants Not Guilty of these two charges. Here are the chain of events associated with Jury deliberation.
The jury received the case for deliberations on Thursday, April 13th, though they did not have their first full day of deliberations until the following Monday, April 17th.
The jury sent questions to the court, which Judge Navarro promptly sealed from public view. No one has access to the actual wording of the questions from the jury, except the judge and the attorneys. This becomes an important point later in the discussion.
Based on the responses and discussion from the court, the gallery
surmised that the jury had ‘hypothetical’ questions pertaining to the
possibility of a hung jury. This meant they did not have consensus on
all of the charges the defendants were facing.
Judge Navarro’s main concern through this entire trial has been the possibility of jury nullification. She appeared to have the same fears regarding the jury’s questions and responded that she was concerned
with the jury considering sentencing or other extremes. She wanted to
guide the jury “back down to a more narrow point of view.”
Three days later, the jury had more questions, which the court promptly sealed again from public view. These questions specifically seem to pertain to the conspiracy charges.
Court Observers felt that the jury was confused on the jury instructions. The
instructions apparently contradicted themselves, in that on one page
they refer to “the defendants” yet another page would refer to “a
person”.
The jury appeared unsure that if they found the defendants ‘guilty’
or ‘not guilty’ of the conspiracy charges, would they then be required
to find all other charges with the same verdict?
On April 20th, it indicated that they had found agreement on several of the charges.
The jury took the weekend off and resumed their deliberations on the following Monday, April 24th.
It was shortly after beginning they came back with a response of
having an agreement on some charges, yet they were deadlocked on many
others.
Judge Navarro sent them back to deliberate longer under an “Allen Charge”, which is an instruction given by a court to a deadlocked jury to encourage it to continue deliberating until it reaches a verdict.
Some states prohibit Allen charges, because they deem them coercive, but the U.S. Supreme Court upheld their use in Allen v. U.S., 164 U.S. 492 (1896). Also called dynamite charge, nitroglycerin charge, shotgun charge, and third-degree instruction.
The prosecution had asked for the Allen charge, but the defense did not.
Later that same day, the jury stated they could not reach a full
agreement and Judge Navarro accepted guilty verdicts on the
aforementioned charges while declaring a mistrial on the remaining
charges, including the two main conspiracy charges.
This is where it gets interesting.
*Disclaimer: I do not claim to be a legal expert, so my conclusions are not based on legal training.
The documents released are the official jury verdict forms. You can view them below.
The official forms are a part of the trial documents and cannot be
altered or removed from the record. These documents are given to the
jury for their deliberations. If a mistake is made on these documents,
the jury foreman is to destroy that copy and request a new form.
The documents clearly show that the jury had reached an agreement on
the conspiracy charges, marking ‘not guilty’ next to the names of all
the defendants for both charges. However, it does appear that there had
been a ‘strike-through’ made on these check-marks.
However, there are no marks at all listed on the ‘guilty’ side of
these charges. If the jury had changed their minds, it would be
reasonable that they would have either gotten a new form, or marked the
other side of the current form.
This suggests that the jury had unanimously decided that there was no actual conspiracy.
They clearly were in agreement on the
guilty charges for Greg Burleson and Todd Engel.
Verdict Form 1 Verdict Form 2 Verdict Form 3 Verdict Form 4
Verdict Form 5 Verdict Form 6 Verdict Form 7 Verdict Form 8
Verdict Form 9 Verdict Form 10 Verdict Form 11
Navarro has scheduled sentencing dates for the two defendants today. Burleson is scheduled for Wednesday, July 26th and Engel is scheduled for the following day, July 27th.
From here on this page will work the same way my other trial pages are set up, this page will update as soon as I can gain access to the information, including video. I will post the most current information at the top, just under this initial information. Come back often, as I will do my best to bring you the updates.
Tier 3 Defendants Up For Re-Trial Include: Ricky Lovelien (MT), Eric Parker (ID), O. Scott Drexler (ID) and Steven Stewart (ID).
It's A Crime There Has Been A Media Blackout Decreed!
You Have To See This Stuff In Order To Believe It,
& I Think EVERYONE Would Be Watching This Trial!
If you are a late-comer, please see what went on in the First Trial of the Tier 3 Defendants.
http://agenda21truth.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html
If you missed what went on in the trial of the
Tier 1 Trial visit this link.
http://agenda21truth.blogspot.com/p/judge-gloria-navarrodoj-third-times.html
Leaked Government Footage Of Criminal Activity At Bundy Ranch.
Watch Dennis Michael Lynch's Documentary here. He was there in Bunkerville.
UPDATE-
August 9, 2018
Scott Drexler appeared before Judge Gloria Navarro today for his Sentencing Hearing. The Prosecution went about trying to convict him of crimes he was acquitted of and brought up every misdeed he'd been accused of including being sighted for driving without a seat belt. They told the Judge that Drexler was a danger to the public and LE Officers in general and needs to learn a lesson, no matter how many family and friends testify to his credibility. They also produced a photo of Drexler and others wearing "Jury Nullification" T-shirts. The Prosecution tried their voodoo effect on Judge Navarro telling her the 2 years he served didn't really happen and sought prison time for at least a year, or at least 5 years probation. The Probation Office said they no longer wanted to be a part of determining time served and suggested if the Judge sentenced him to return to prison the Bureau Of Prisons be the deciding factor in determining any time served.
Todd Leventhal went to bat for his client by putting on a brilliant defense. Leventhal read the verdict set fourth by the Jury reminding the Judge the Jury had spoken on the matter TWICE, clearing the slate of all the mumbo-jumbo the Prosecutors just tried to feed Judge Navarro in order to score a conviction on charges unrelated to the plea deal. Leventhal told the Judge how they were extremely worn out from two trials or they would have fought in the third trial, but he Prosecution came to them offering a misdemeanor plea deal, so they took it. If the Prosecution thought he was such a danger, why make the offer? Leventhal really stepped forward telling the court that if they looked at the Bundy Ranch incident with clear vision they would see that the public was the victim NOT the government bureaucrats. Leventhal told the court that he met Drexler in October of 2016 in Prison in Pahrump while eating a sandwich and he was sickened by what he was eating. He was subject to strip-searches, it was a horrible time for him. He continued, Drexler has abided by every stipulation in the Pre-Trial Release, he was told not to talk to Eric Parker, his friend, and if they talked it had to be with an Attorney present, so I went out of my way to set up those conference calls. He abided by every word.
Judge Gloria Navarro went on at great length bringing up the subject of Drexler "threatening violence" at federal officers and of his wearing a "Jury Nullification" T-shirt. She said she understands when people get frustrated while getting ignored by government when trying to make their grievances heard, but being violent or threatening violence is not the way to handle it, (she is forgetting here that the Bundy supporters went to the wash to watch the cowboys bring the cows home and were surprised to be met with a standing army behind a cattle-guard fence with their weapons drawn). Judge Navarro told Drexler she hoped that he would begin seeing these government types as "regular people" and find other ways of dealing with them. She went on to talk about the fluctuation of Public and Federal land changing hands constantly and violence should never be the answer.
Judge Navarro passed down a sentence of credit time served and no supervised probation because of the time he had served pre-trial. The Prosecution then stood to motion to the court that the Indictment against Scott Drexler be dismissed . . .BOOM! The Judge reminded Drexler of the rights he forfeited but emphasized he retained others including the right to appeal. The government is no longer seeking restitution or fines or asset forfeiture. Hearings were scheduled for November 8th and 16th in the case Drexler decides on an appeal.
Eric Parker also appeared before Judge Navarro today. Reports are that he retains no obligation for restitution or fines and was sentenced to 1 year supervised probation, 1 year time served. I'll provide more detail as it comes available.
Eric Parker also appeared before Judge Navarro today. Reports are that he retains no obligation for restitution or fines and was sentenced to 1 year supervised probation, 1 year time served. I'll provide more detail as it comes available.
UPDATE-
August 6, 2018
Eric Parker received his Sentencing Memorandum today. His sentencing will take place August 9, 2018. We'll keep you updated, in the mean time, listen to what Eric had to say about the memorandum, it contains a special message to Utah Senator Mike Lee.
 |
| Click the Photo to Watch the Video. |
UPDATE ~
October 22, 2017
Eric Parker To Plead To a Misdemeanor
by Shari Dovale
The Trial of the Century has gotten a little bit smaller.
Currently, 6 men are expected to be tried in the Bunkerville Standoff trial expected to begin jury selection on October 30th. Cliven Bundy, his sons Ammon and Ryan, as well as Ryan Payne are ready. Eric Parker and Scott Drexler are scheduled for their third trial, after two previous trials this year resulting in acquittals and deadlocked verdicts.
But Parker and Drexler have been offered plea agreements by the government that will allow them to close the book on this chapter of their lives.
After negotiations that have gone back and forth for weeks, Eric Parker has been offered a plea agreement that he feels would be the best for his family.
Parker has agreed to accept a misdemeanor charge of “Obstruction of a Court Order.” This basically means that he will agree that he went to the bridge after Cliven spoke at the rally. He heard the BLM officers say that there was a court order and the protesters need to leave. The agreement does mention that Parker was armed and refused to leave the area when the officers told him to do so.
That’s it. It is a very basic misdemeanor charge that will allow for time already served in prison and probation. This is very similar to the agreement that Scott Drexler was offered. It is anticipated that Drexler will be considering accepting a similar deal as well.
The charge allows for up to 5 years of probation, which the prosecution intends to argue in favor of. The defense believes that, since Parker and Drexler have already served more time than this charge calls for, they should have a greater than average chance of a short probation.
Parker’s plea agreement includes a no forfeiture clause and a no restitution clause, so his financial situation will not be precarious. Additionally, Parker will not be required to testify in the upcoming trial.
The change of plea hearing is scheduled for Monday morning, October 23rd, at 8 o’clock in the morning.
 | |
| Click To Watch The Video |
UPDATE ~
October 6, 2017
Don't believe Judge Navarro's narrative. She is working with CCA/Core Civic Of America to keep these two men who were found NOT GUILTY in the Oregon Trial out of proceedings, once again trying to convict them in absentia!
September 28, 2017
Via Angie Bundy FB ~ "Just a few of my observations from Cliven's hearing yesterday...he objected over and over that Prosecutor Myhre was in attendance with an assistant. They (prosecution team) were also in attendance for Ryan's hearing that he wasn't transported to. Why do they need to be involved with who represents our side legally? What happened to choosing our legal assistance? Cliven fired his attorney, but was told yesterday that he couldn't, by Magistrate Leen. It's my opinion that the Prosecutor is running this show, and these judges and magistrates need him present to make decisions. Also, Cliven has been an incredible Grandpa and Father. We love and miss him. He is capable of making decisions for himself. He is very aware of his rights, and that is really what this case is about. Our family knew our rights, and simply protested when they were being violated. But happy Thursday my friends...God is still in charge 😊"
UPDATE ~
September 24, 2017
DOJ Adds New Prosecutor To The Case. Daniel R. Schiess Attended Brigham Young University Law School. The team is continuing its last ditch efforts to eliminate a defense for the seven defendants who will be going to trial October 10, 2017. In Court Documents filed today outline their attempt at preventing the defendants from mentioning anything about the government acting unlawfully or unethically or mentioning their rights protected by the US Constitution during opening or closing arguments including:
Self-defense, defense of others, or defense of property, justification, necessity arguments which have no foundation in the law;
Third-party/lay person testimony or opinion about the level of force displayed or used by law enforcement officers during impoundment operations, including operations on April 6, 9, and 12, 2014;
Opinions/public statements of Governor Brian Sandoval of April 8, 2014, and/or opinions registered by other political office holders or opinion leaders about BLM impoundment operations;
Allegations of workplace misconduct by the SAC of the impoundment, or regarding those who worked for, or with, him.
Allegations that officers connected with the impoundment acted unethically or improperly by the way they were dressed or equipped during the impoundment, or that they improperly shredded documents during or after impoundment operations;
References to supposed mistreatment of cattle during the impoundment operations;
Legal arguments, beliefs, explanations, or opinions that the federal government does not own the land or have legal authority or jurisdiction over public lands where impoundment operations were conducted, or that the land was or is otherwise owned by the State of Nevada;
Legal arguments, beliefs, explanations, or opinions regarding infringement on First and Second Amendment rights, including any effort to confuse the jury that there is some form of “journalist” or
“protest” immunity for the crimes charged;
References to punishment the defendants may face if convicted of the offenses;
References to the Oregon trial of United States v. Ammon Bundy,
Ryan Payne, and Ryan Bundy., or the results in that trial;
References to the outcomes in the previous two trials in this case;
and
Legal arguments, explanations, or opinions advancing defendants’ views of the U.S. Constitution, including claims that law enforcement officers within the Department of Interior have no constitutional authority, that “natural law” or other authority permits the use of force against law enforcement officers in defense of property or individual rights, or that the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada has no jurisdiction or authority under the constitution to order the removal of cattle from public lands.
Now, from seeing the continued abuse of power steaming from Steven Myhre and his gang of suit and tie, I am going to say SHAME ON YOU Steven Myhre a "professed member of the LDS Church", and Daniel Schiess a graduate of an LDS University (BYU) for setting fire to the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights! You should be called out for "digging a pit for your neighbor" (bearing false witness) in any Christian circles! Will you also be praying for favoritism from the Almighty as you mount your "pale white horse" to skewer these defendants?
UPDATE ~
September 21, 2017
Larry Klayman files complaint against Jeff Sessions et al, Judge Gloria Navarro and Prosecutor Steven Myhre and asks for an investigation sighting Gross Misconduct.
UPDATE ~
August 31, 2017
The First of several actions against Gloria Navarro currently serving as Judge Federal Circuit Court of Nevada. Commercial Lien Case #95 CR 17-10000 filed by Jeremy Lowe from Utah.
August 31, 2017
Hearing Update-
This morning Judge Gloria Navarro and the DOJ called a hearing to determine if the Prosecution has enough evidence to take Tier 1 to trial. It was determined by the Judge that there is sufficient evidence. The Defense sought to get redacted information from the government regarding BLM Personnel and Longbow Productions, the phony video production company that went about trying to get the defendants to incriminate themselves by feeding them loads of candy and liquor. At least two of the redacted have been arrested and accused of committing crimes on government time/dollar. Steven Myhre insisted that the government has met it's requirements via Brady/Giglio and Jencks. Ammon Bundy was not present during today's proceedings because of the 3 strip searches required for his transport. A statement was read in court by his council on this subject. Judge Gloria Navarro told everyone present, "I cannot MAKE Mr. Bundy attend his court hearings". Truth is, Judge Navarro was fully aware of what was actually being done to Ammon, and WHY he was not in attendance at the court hearing. Ryan Bundy brought several motions, one being the motion of pre-trial release do to the fact that only an act of Congress can hold an American Citizen without a conviction. Second, Ryan asked Judge Navarro to address the FACT that the Plaintiff is not living, referring to the fact that if there is no victim there can be no crime and the government IS NOT a victim! Ryan also sought a release of his current stand by Council, as she filed papers without the knowledge of her client. This is problematic, as Council is not acting on behalf of the client, not allowing the Defendant to direct Council on his behalf. Ryan Bundy is acting Pro se but Judge Gloria Navarro is requiring him, just like she did with Todd Engel, to remain attached at the hip to insufficient council. Ryan's motions resulted in Judge Navarro requiring he submit to a Ferretta Hearing. There was also a motion to have Eric Parker and Scott Drexler, leftovers from Tier 3, join with Tier 1 Defendants Cliven Bundy, Ammon Bundy, Ryan Bundy, Ryan Payne and Pete Santilli as to not deny them their trial do to Judge Navarro allowing the DOJ to keep trying Tier 3 until they get a conviction. Judge Navarro allowed the motion to combine. Jury selection for the Tier 1 Trial will begin on October 3, 2017 and it is expected that testimony will begin October 10, 2017. The Prosecution estimated they will take 7 weeks to present their "evidence" and if Judge Navarro has her way, as she did last trial, there will be no Defense witnesses. The 5 men still held against their will will be kept at the Detention Center in Pahrump Nevada up to and including the trial so as to accommodate all the Defendants and their Council for prep meetings, with the exception of Eric Parker and Scott Drexler as they have been granted pre-trial release.
 |
| NDAA Detaining Americans Without Due Process Video. Please Click To Watch. |
 | |||||||
| The TRUTH About The LIE Judge Gloria Navarro Told. Click Photo To Watch. |
Judge Gloria Navarro MUST be reviewed by the Judicial Administration!
Judge Navarro continued to serve as Judge on these two trials and all the other trials and hearings although she is violating every rule set out in the Code!
"Generally, a judge must recuse himself if he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party to the lawsuit or has personal knowledge of the facts that are disputed in the proceeding. The Code of Judicial Conduct, a judicial ethics code drafted by the American Bar Association in 1972 and adopted by most states and the federal government, outlines situations in which a judge should disqualify himself from presiding over a matter. Canon 3C of the Judicial Code outlines these situations, including the judge's personal bias or prejudice toward a matter or its participants, personal knowledge of the facts that are disputed in a case, a professional or familial relationship with a party or an attorney, or a financial interest in the outcome of the matter. Most interpretations of the code mandate a judge's disqualification or recusal if any of these factors are present”.
Larry Klayman files complaint against Jeff Sessions DOJ/Prosecution Steven Myhre for misconduct.
In light of this article in the Las Vegas Review Journal "Bundy Black Eye" in the printed version circulated locally, Judge Navarro should recuse herself or the public's outcry for removal is in order.
URGENT!
October 24, 2017
Facebook is blocking the general public without accounts from viewing the Ammon Bundy Page that documents his abuse and which has been open to the public for months. I think this is being done by the CIA themselves, who created fb, and also the FBI. I did stumble upon this today and went to work producing a video with the affidavits from witnesses to the wounds do to abuse of Ammon, Ryan and Cliven Bundy which they received at the hands of the US Marshall's while the men were in chains, included handcuffs, leg irons and belly chains. It apparently took place in the elevator in the Federal Courthouse. Attorney's and courtroom observers alike noticed the injuries as their faces were blotchy and countenances were effected along with blood and abrasions to their wrists and arms. The Attorney for Cliven Bundy brought the subject up to Judge Gloria Navarro in court, and Ammon also petitioned the Judge, but she refused to listen, silencing the men, and did not address the problem. As far as we know, NOTHING has been done to hold the US Marshall's and Judge Navarro accountable! This is COWARDOUS of the Marshall's as they should protect NOT abuse as they did to these men in chains. Please watch the video and help the Defense if you can.
Hearing Update
August 23, 2017
Eric Parker’s Arraignment Hearing was conducted this morning. Prosecutor Steven Myhre moved to have Parker re-tried a third time. Myhre tried to make the case form Parker being a flight risk and dangerous. Judge Gloria Navarro asked the Prosecution questions about Eric Parker’s initial arrest by the FBI and denied the Prosecutions claims and granted Parker pre-trial release. Judge Navarro made a stipulation that Parker cannot have contact with any of the co-defendants. We are waiting for clarification weather that means Scott Drexler, as the government released a statement yesterday saying they will re-try both men, or if it means the over 200 people on the witness list. Prosecutor Myhre tried to us the #NoVictimNoCrime to further demonize Parker and called him a “coward” in open court saying, “he ducked behind the jersey barrier and he’ll do it again”. Myhre also produced a Facebook Post of Eric talking about standing for liberty and his neighbor, but Myhre inserted his own words to totally turn the language around to make Parker sound vindictive and vengeful. One report said Myhre and Navarro both were in fits of rage and displayed childish behavior. Parker is awaiting his release at the courthouse after a letter is obtained that guarantees his release and will return to Idaho upon his release.
No word yet on Scott Drexler’s Hearing outcome.
Re-Trial set for September 25, 2017
Verdict
August 22, 2017
Celebrations are dominant throughout the Patriot community. The four men on trial for the second time in Las Vegas, Nevada are being released.
Eric Parker, Scott Drexler, Steven Stewart and Ricky Lovelien were found No Guilty by the Jury as they returned a 34, out of 40 verdicts today.
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 Lovelien 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).
All Defendants were 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.
Jury Watch
August 21, 2017
It was reported that the power went off in the Federal Courthouse in Nevada today, but first, the Jury had some questions that were not read in total today. Only a few words were mentioned, Judge Navarro being very tight lipped about them. One was a question in regards to Thursday’s court session, and the other was in regards to “bias in two Jury Members”, the note beginning “we the Jurors". The two Jurors, numbers 6 and 9, were brought in for questioning, the Defense siting cause for a Mistrial, do to the fact that one Jury Member burst out in anger stating, “you’ve never had a gun pointed at your head”! And the other revealing that she was an “Officer of the Court” for 18 years. Juror number 6 told the court, through questioning, the incident with the gun was during her childhood. She admitted it was not in conjunction to a crime being committed, but she had no adverse opinion as to gun ownership. Judge Navarro, in a case of pure irony, determined the Juror’s experience did not constitute assault! But, these four men on trial committed assault on Government Agents just having a firearm in the presence of a “Law Enforcement Officer”. You can’t make this stuff up! Juror number 9 was employed in "Bankruptcy Court” and continues to tell the other Jury Members, “I need to uphold the court". The claim of the Jury Members as to this Juror was that she was “not deliberating”, or discussing the details of the case with the other members. Judge Navarro referred the Juror to Jury Rules #37. From the sounds of it, we have a lot of very opinionated Jurors that are not exempt from boisterously voicing their opinion, even in anger OUTSIDE deliberation, as it was revealed today during questioning of the two Jurors. The Defense told the Court “if these two Jurors would have answered these questions truthfully on the Jury Questionnaire they would have been dismissed on these accounts alone since there was a Jury Question asking them specifically if they had had a weapon pointed at them. Judge Navarro is siding with the Prosecution in a determination on keeping these two Jurors on the case although the Jury Members discussing the case outside the deliberation room is improper and violates the Jury Rules. Judge Navarro skirted the issue of the Defense’s request for a Mistrial, which is just par for the course with Navarro.
August 15, 2017
Scott Drexler was able to give his testimony in his own defense this morning in court. Todd Leventhal, Drexler’s Attorney, brought in information about Sugar Pine Mine and Oregon the Prosecution objected and he requested a side bar and Judge Gloria Navarro told him “no”! Leventhal had Drexler tell how his Father was a County Sheriff for over 16 years and that there were no arrests in Montana at the White Hope Mine Protest. The Prosecution objected to this and it was sustained. This was pretty much all that was reported of Drexler’s testimony.
During cross examination by the Prosecution, Scott Drexler’s interview with the phony, fake FBI Production Company “Longbow Productions” was read. When Drexler did not give their preferred answer the Prosecution objected to their own question and asked that Drexler’s answer be struck from the record, then they would ask the question again, repeating this process until they got the answer they wanted, or until they were completely frustrated. It was said that Todd Leventhal was able to untangle the Prosecutions tangled web and put it into context for the Jury.
Some of the Jury questions that were reported on in this session were, “when you were being interviewed, did you know it was the FBI”? I must warn you that although the answers to these questions are predictable the answers are not always reported, so I’m just going to move on. Another question, “when you traveled to Bunkerville to meet up with militia did you favor one militia over another”? Next, “Idaho III% does community service, but do they do tactical training”? Scott Drexler said, “yes, there is tactical training, but safety with firearms in very important”. The next question was, “was Idaho III% in existence before the Bunkerville Protest”? The answer was, “no”. There were five questions that were not read for answering by the Jury and after some investigation it was revealed that these questions were all asking why they would bring a weapon to a Protest?
Courtroom Observers are reporting that certain individuals are not allowed in the court room. BJ Soper told a story about the US Marshall’s banning him from the courtroom “by order of the US Marshall’s”. He went through some “rigamarole” on the second floor and he’s out! Believe it or not.
In the afternoon session the Prosecution used a Power Point in their closing statement, showing the scariest photos they can find of the Defendants and using melodramatics saying, “they did it”! Second, “they helped each other do it”! And, “they agreed with each other to do it! They saw things on Facebook and decided to go and help their neighbors”.
BREAKING NEWS! Before Judge Navarro asked the Defendants if they were ready for their Closing Arguments a note was passed along the Defense Table and each Defendant could be seen signing it. When Judge Navarro asked them about their Closing Arguments each one of the Defendants rose to tell the court they will not give closing arguments saying, “Eric Parker will not have a closing argument Steven Stewart will not have a closing argument O’Scott Drexler will not have a closing argument Ricky Lovelien will not have a closing argument . Making a statement that they have, to this point, not been given an opportunity to bring a defense, to they will no longer be a party to this charade that is being called a trial. The Prosecution moved forward with their Closing Arguments and used words like “sniper” that the Defense was banned from uttering. They played video of Cliven Bundy’s speech on the stage in it’s entirety. Ammon Bundy’s speech also, in it’s entirety.
During cross examination by the Prosecution, Scott Drexler’s interview with the phony, fake FBI Production Company “Longbow Productions” was read. When Drexler did not give their preferred answer the Prosecution objected to their own question and asked that Drexler’s answer be struck from the record, then they would ask the question again, repeating this process until they got the answer they wanted, or until they were completely frustrated. It was said that Todd Leventhal was able to untangle the Prosecutions tangled web and put it into context for the Jury.
Some of the Jury questions that were reported on in this session were, “when you were being interviewed, did you know it was the FBI”? I must warn you that although the answers to these questions are predictable the answers are not always reported, so I’m just going to move on. Another question, “when you traveled to Bunkerville to meet up with militia did you favor one militia over another”? Next, “Idaho III% does community service, but do they do tactical training”? Scott Drexler said, “yes, there is tactical training, but safety with firearms in very important”. The next question was, “was Idaho III% in existence before the Bunkerville Protest”? The answer was, “no”. There were five questions that were not read for answering by the Jury and after some investigation it was revealed that these questions were all asking why they would bring a weapon to a Protest?
Courtroom Observers are reporting that certain individuals are not allowed in the court room. BJ Soper told a story about the US Marshall’s banning him from the courtroom “by order of the US Marshall’s”. He went through some “rigamarole” on the second floor and he’s out! Believe it or not.
In the afternoon session the Prosecution used a Power Point in their closing statement, showing the scariest photos they can find of the Defendants and using melodramatics saying, “they did it”! Second, “they helped each other do it”! And, “they agreed with each other to do it! They saw things on Facebook and decided to go and help their neighbors”.
BREAKING NEWS! Before Judge Navarro asked the Defendants if they were ready for their Closing Arguments a note was passed along the Defense Table and each Defendant could be seen signing it. When Judge Navarro asked them about their Closing Arguments each one of the Defendants rose to tell the court they will not give closing arguments saying, “Eric Parker will not have a closing argument Steven Stewart will not have a closing argument O’Scott Drexler will not have a closing argument Ricky Lovelien will not have a closing argument . Making a statement that they have, to this point, not been given an opportunity to bring a defense, to they will no longer be a party to this charade that is being called a trial. The Prosecution moved forward with their Closing Arguments and used words like “sniper” that the Defense was banned from uttering. They played video of Cliven Bundy’s speech on the stage in it’s entirety. Ammon Bundy’s speech also, in it’s entirety.
 |
| Bureau Of Land Management Snipers On The Hill |
The Inspiring Words of Ammon, Steve & Cliven Bundy
The Defense tried to file a Motion in the afternoon session of court today. Judge Gloria Navarro told them to "file it” and would not listen to the Defense voice the Motion and walked off the stand, leaving everyone stunned again in the courtroom! The Jury was told to start deliberation immediately. When the Defendants left the courtroom they were seen to have given a wink and a thumbs up to the Observers. The Courtroom Observers are in dis-belief, since just when you’ve seen it all, something more shocking happens. They held a prayer circle in the hallway after leaving the courtroom.
Courtroom Observers are reporting that the Defense did not utter the words, “we rest our case”, which leaves the door open to speculation as to what that means. It is also being reported that the Judge told all the Defense Attorney’s to meet her in her chambers, where they are, undoubtedly, being lectured by Judge Navarro. The Defense Attorney’s were also heard saying, “what is she going to do now, arrest us”? And, like in Portland during the First Trial where everyone was acquitted, this might be the case! Jess Marchese told one Observer this opens the door for them as “Ineffectual Counsel”, they get to “layer up” and come before a different Judge in the Nevada Federal Court System and Judge Gloria Navarro THEN becomes the Defendant! Checkmate!
August 14, 2017
Breaking - Judge Gloria Navarro & DOJ File Sanctions Against Defendants and Their Attorney's!
The courtroom is filled to capacity today with Observers even to overflowing in to the hallway.
When court was under way at 9:00 a.m. this morning Judge Gloria Navarro kept the Jury our of the courtroom and spent her time defending her actions since day one of the trial. She also berated the Defense Attorney’s and threatened them with legal action so much so that they wanted the trial stopped so they could all acquire legal representation. This threat is in legal form in the document link above. Judge Navarro explained to the Defense that they should leave out pertinent evidence against the government using the comparison of a rape victim to the Defendants and having a child out of wedlock to the government aggressors. The Prosecution tried to make Navarro’s threat to have Eric Parker’s testimony stricken from the record official, by filing a motion before the Judge this morning. The Defense Attorneys tried several time to get Judge Navarro off her soap box and bring the Jury in so testimony for the Defense could resume, but turned a deaf ear to in calling a morning recess.
After morning recess, Judge Navarro spent some time bullying Stcott Drexler about his feeling admonished to testify in this case since Judge Navarro is preventing witness testimony in their defense by others who were at the Protest. He told the Judge he had to, he had no other choice. Navarro insisted that he didn’t have to and he should not feel pressured into doing so. He made it clear to her that she has put him in the corner and he has to come out fighting. Judge Navarro, of coarse, is in denial, she doesn’t want him to testify because she wants to slam the door on the case. But, when the chips are down, you’ve got to roll the dice!
In this session of court the Observers are referring to these sessions as “Hearings”. Judge Navarro continues to nitpick what she will allow Scott Drexler to say telling his Attorney to question him carefully so he doesn’t violate the court order where he is forbidden to talk about the tyranny of the government and it’s agencies pointing guns and threatening to use lethal force upon the American People. Judge Navarro reminds Drexler that he cannot claim self defense or the defense of others in his testimony. One small victory, the Defense was successful at getting one word changed in the Jury Instructions. The word “victim” will be struck and the words “las enforcement” will be inserted. The Jury has still not been allowed in the courtroom.
When court was under way at 9:00 a.m. this morning Judge Gloria Navarro kept the Jury our of the courtroom and spent her time defending her actions since day one of the trial. She also berated the Defense Attorney’s and threatened them with legal action so much so that they wanted the trial stopped so they could all acquire legal representation. This threat is in legal form in the document link above. Judge Navarro explained to the Defense that they should leave out pertinent evidence against the government using the comparison of a rape victim to the Defendants and having a child out of wedlock to the government aggressors. The Prosecution tried to make Navarro’s threat to have Eric Parker’s testimony stricken from the record official, by filing a motion before the Judge this morning. The Defense Attorneys tried several time to get Judge Navarro off her soap box and bring the Jury in so testimony for the Defense could resume, but turned a deaf ear to in calling a morning recess.
After morning recess, Judge Navarro spent some time bullying Stcott Drexler about his feeling admonished to testify in this case since Judge Navarro is preventing witness testimony in their defense by others who were at the Protest. He told the Judge he had to, he had no other choice. Navarro insisted that he didn’t have to and he should not feel pressured into doing so. He made it clear to her that she has put him in the corner and he has to come out fighting. Judge Navarro, of coarse, is in denial, she doesn’t want him to testify because she wants to slam the door on the case. But, when the chips are down, you’ve got to roll the dice!
In this session of court the Observers are referring to these sessions as “Hearings”. Judge Navarro continues to nitpick what she will allow Scott Drexler to say telling his Attorney to question him carefully so he doesn’t violate the court order where he is forbidden to talk about the tyranny of the government and it’s agencies pointing guns and threatening to use lethal force upon the American People. Judge Navarro reminds Drexler that he cannot claim self defense or the defense of others in his testimony. One small victory, the Defense was successful at getting one word changed in the Jury Instructions. The word “victim” will be struck and the words “las enforcement” will be inserted. The Jury has still not been allowed in the courtroom.
August 10, 2017
It’s official! Judge Gloria Navarro will not allow any witnesses for the Defendants for this trial. It is said that the decree came from a disheveled Navarro as it looked as if she had not slept at all last night. The Defendants may take the stand if they wish. Eric Parker is taking to the stand to try to testify in his own defense. Judge Navarro allowed Parker to be un-shackled in order to walk un-assisted to the witness stand, thanks to a motion by his Attorney Jess Marchese. A US Marshall is given assignment to sit right beside Parker as he testifies on the stand. Eric was sworn in and began telling his story of WHY he went to Bunkerville, where he spent less than 24 hours but was arrested and indicted two years later, and has spent 18 months in prison, denied bail and awaiting acquittal. Eric was repeatedly interrupted by the Prosecution with objections at every turn. When Eric mentioned the “First Amendment Area”, the video of Snipers On The Hill, and other videos of… “Objection”! Eric told the Jury he had saw photos and video on April 8, 9 and 10 2014 that he could not ignore and drove to Bunkerville with his childhood friend Steven Stewart and Scott Drexler whom he became acquainted with. Although Eric Parker has been allowed to take the stand in him own defense, he is constantly interrupted by the Prosecution and has been allowed to say little in his less than 15 minutes on the stand. He is essentially bound and gagged by the government. After a plethora of objections a 20 minute side bar ensued.
At the conclusion of the side bar Judge Gloria Navarro berated Eric Parker in front of the Jury saying, “I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt, even though I think you are purposefully violating the court order”. The Prosecution siting that Parker should not be allowed to say what he heard that, “people in the wash would be shot”, nor “snipers on the mesa”, that he cannot say that he “was afraid he may be shot” or, that “others would be shot”. The Prosecution saying, “it goes to ‘standing’, he cannot state these things because it goes to a legal defense that is not available to him”. This is what I told you about yesterday as Judge Navarro told the Defense basically, you cannot defend yourself against the Federal Government! YOU HAVE NO DEFENSE! Proving the point the government is trying to make, that if you feel threatened, even by your own government that has high powered weapons pointed at you, YOU HAVE NO DEFENSE! YOU CANNOT DEFEND YOURSELF! Or others In one fail swoop abolishing the Second Amendment! At this point Judge Navarro disagreed with the Prosecution saying, “he can testify about what he saw and what he heard”, but then slapping him in the face by saying, “as long as he does not testify to what he saw and heard, as long as it does not go to his self defense or the defense of others, because that would go to Jury Nullification”.
Eric Parker continued his testimony telling the Jury about his trip to Bunkerville stating, “we showed up late”. Eric told how he was aware that there was talk of Court Orders and ,”they were talking about grazing rights”. Which received another objection. Eric was denied talking about either. Jess Marchese asked if he went to Bunkerville to get the cattle back? This the government will let him talk about, because it perpetuates their narrative, that Cliven Bundy is a bad dude who doesn’t pay the government to graze on the open range he’s entitled to since statehood! Eric cannot talk about the First Amendment Speech Zone, Ammon Bundy having a K-9 sicked on him and being tased by Bureau Of Land Management personnel, Margaret Houston being approached from behind having one of her arms disabled by a BLM employee while he threw her to the ground so she couldn’t break her fall, Police and Paramedics refusing to answer 911 calls to the area because the BLM/Sheriffs Office gave orders to reject the calls, Davey Bundy being accosted by BLM employees for taking pictures on the side of the road and having his face ground into the gravel carting him off to a BLM station for interrogation for several hours, driven to Las Vegas for detention and thrown out on the streets with nothing but a sack lunch and the government has still not returned his iPad which he was using to take pictures with. Eric answered the question, “no, my decision to go had nothing to do with cattle”. Eric told about calling the Euclid Stockyard in Apple Valley California because he heard that the BLM was rounding up the cattle but not selling them off. He talked about his plan to go and protest. Eric told how he did not know Ricky Lovelien. He camped next to him without knowing his name and that, “he only got in a vehicle with him because of a problem with parking”. Eric also told the Jury the only reason he brought his weapon to the stage on April 12, 2014 was because he did not want to leave it in the tent at the campsite, this would be irresponsible. Eric told that the reason he took his weapon out of the truck was because he heard there were “people" on the mesa, not saying “snipers” as to keep his testimony from being objected to, but not so fast! It drew objection from the Prosecution. Jess Marchese submitted photo evidence of “people” on the mesa with high-powered weapons pointed at the Protestors and Parker himself. The Prosecution objected to the evidence which resulted in a side bar. This motion was sustained by Judge Navarro and it was reported that all of the evidence the Defense has submitted up to this report has been denied by the Judge. Hopefully the Jury sees that the evidence for the Defense is being censored. But, it was also reported today that not only is the Jury being allowed to eat their bowl of candy provided by Judge Navarro, but they get to listen to music and chat at every side bar, so maybe this is enough to distract them from what the government is doing to deny a defense. There were many setbacks for the Defense in the last trial but they had some success, as Eric Parker testified last trial, in getting some of their exhibits and testimony on the record, but the government has learned its lesson and have cracked down on the case even more, limiting anything that was testified to in the last trial. The only thing remaining if the government decides to Prosecute again is a Firing Squad! Parker will on the stand again after noon break.
Eric Parker took the stand in his own defense after the lunch break. He resumed his testimony telling the Jury, when asked by Jess Marchese, “and which direction were you looking”. Eric Parker responding said, “I was looking forward and up to the right”, referring to seeing the BLM Snipers on the hill, WITHOUT MENTIONING THEM OUTRIGHT! Judge Gloria Navarro immediately told him she was striking his testimony from the record and had the US Marshall yank him off the stand! Eric Parker will no longer be able to testify. Judge Navarro asked the Defense to put other witnesses on the stand, but the Defense was only planning on having Parker on the stand, so court was dismissed.
Other Court Observers reported they could not have believed what happened in court if they hadn’t seen it themselves. Others report she had a meltdown. Judge Navarro read the first question from the Jury, looked at it to proof read, threw the paper on her desk and walked off the bench! Everyone thinks Judge Navarro is being manipulated and threatened herself. Some think she is wired with an earpiece, like the one Hillary was using during her campaign and in debates. This would be used to direct her speech and demeanor.
At one point during Eric’s testimony while trying to tell the Jury about the BLM/NPS vehicles and their dress, even saying “they were in street clothes” and not mentioning weapons at all and trying to get around saying anything about insignia or any identifiers, maybe hoping the Jury will ask a question. It’s our only hope at this point! These two subjects are the only points Eric was making on the stand. The Courtroom Observers say he spent less than an hour on the stand before he was ushered off the stand. It was said that the Jury was also stunned and just sat in their seats not knowing weather to get up and leave. Eric did give the Jury a prolonged stare as he was escorted back to the Defense table by a “to young to know better” US Marshall. Eric broke down in tears in his seat and put his head in his hands. It was said that, he too, was shocked to be banished from the witness stand by Navarro.
August 9, 2017
Eric Parker continued his testimony telling the Jury about his trip to Bunkerville stating, “we showed up late”. Eric told how he was aware that there was talk of Court Orders and ,”they were talking about grazing rights”. Which received another objection. Eric was denied talking about either. Jess Marchese asked if he went to Bunkerville to get the cattle back? This the government will let him talk about, because it perpetuates their narrative, that Cliven Bundy is a bad dude who doesn’t pay the government to graze on the open range he’s entitled to since statehood! Eric cannot talk about the First Amendment Speech Zone, Ammon Bundy having a K-9 sicked on him and being tased by Bureau Of Land Management personnel, Margaret Houston being approached from behind having one of her arms disabled by a BLM employee while he threw her to the ground so she couldn’t break her fall, Police and Paramedics refusing to answer 911 calls to the area because the BLM/Sheriffs Office gave orders to reject the calls, Davey Bundy being accosted by BLM employees for taking pictures on the side of the road and having his face ground into the gravel carting him off to a BLM station for interrogation for several hours, driven to Las Vegas for detention and thrown out on the streets with nothing but a sack lunch and the government has still not returned his iPad which he was using to take pictures with. Eric answered the question, “no, my decision to go had nothing to do with cattle”. Eric told about calling the Euclid Stockyard in Apple Valley California because he heard that the BLM was rounding up the cattle but not selling them off. He talked about his plan to go and protest. Eric told how he did not know Ricky Lovelien. He camped next to him without knowing his name and that, “he only got in a vehicle with him because of a problem with parking”. Eric also told the Jury the only reason he brought his weapon to the stage on April 12, 2014 was because he did not want to leave it in the tent at the campsite, this would be irresponsible. Eric told that the reason he took his weapon out of the truck was because he heard there were “people" on the mesa, not saying “snipers” as to keep his testimony from being objected to, but not so fast! It drew objection from the Prosecution. Jess Marchese submitted photo evidence of “people” on the mesa with high-powered weapons pointed at the Protestors and Parker himself. The Prosecution objected to the evidence which resulted in a side bar. This motion was sustained by Judge Navarro and it was reported that all of the evidence the Defense has submitted up to this report has been denied by the Judge. Hopefully the Jury sees that the evidence for the Defense is being censored. But, it was also reported today that not only is the Jury being allowed to eat their bowl of candy provided by Judge Navarro, but they get to listen to music and chat at every side bar, so maybe this is enough to distract them from what the government is doing to deny a defense. There were many setbacks for the Defense in the last trial but they had some success, as Eric Parker testified last trial, in getting some of their exhibits and testimony on the record, but the government has learned its lesson and have cracked down on the case even more, limiting anything that was testified to in the last trial. The only thing remaining if the government decides to Prosecute again is a Firing Squad! Parker will on the stand again after noon break.
Eric Parker took the stand in his own defense after the lunch break. He resumed his testimony telling the Jury, when asked by Jess Marchese, “and which direction were you looking”. Eric Parker responding said, “I was looking forward and up to the right”, referring to seeing the BLM Snipers on the hill, WITHOUT MENTIONING THEM OUTRIGHT! Judge Gloria Navarro immediately told him she was striking his testimony from the record and had the US Marshall yank him off the stand! Eric Parker will no longer be able to testify. Judge Navarro asked the Defense to put other witnesses on the stand, but the Defense was only planning on having Parker on the stand, so court was dismissed.
Other Court Observers reported they could not have believed what happened in court if they hadn’t seen it themselves. Others report she had a meltdown. Judge Navarro read the first question from the Jury, looked at it to proof read, threw the paper on her desk and walked off the bench! Everyone thinks Judge Navarro is being manipulated and threatened herself. Some think she is wired with an earpiece, like the one Hillary was using during her campaign and in debates. This would be used to direct her speech and demeanor.
At one point during Eric’s testimony while trying to tell the Jury about the BLM/NPS vehicles and their dress, even saying “they were in street clothes” and not mentioning weapons at all and trying to get around saying anything about insignia or any identifiers, maybe hoping the Jury will ask a question. It’s our only hope at this point! These two subjects are the only points Eric was making on the stand. The Courtroom Observers say he spent less than an hour on the stand before he was ushered off the stand. It was said that the Jury was also stunned and just sat in their seats not knowing weather to get up and leave. Eric did give the Jury a prolonged stare as he was escorted back to the Defense table by a “to young to know better” US Marshall. Eric broke down in tears in his seat and put his head in his hands. It was said that, he too, was shocked to be banished from the witness stand by Navarro.
Courtroom Observer Testimony Of Judge Gloria Navarro's Tyranny
Watch the Video Above
August 9, 2017
There is a lot of support for the Defendants in court today. The Jury will not be present for today’s proceedings. The Government has STILL not rested their case, although the last witness, Case Agent Joel Willis, wrapped up his testimony and cross examination yesterday. Judge Gloria Navarro prodded, coaxed and begged the Defense to file their 29a Motions before the Prosecution officially rests its case. The Defense is defending, and reserving, its right to not file under redress as Judge Navarro is insisting.
Today’s court proceedings will be “Proffering” of the Defense Witnesses. Ken Rhodes, known as Orange Hat Man, testified via Skype. All we know right now is that Mr. Rhodes was asked a lot of questions like, “did you sign a petition to have Judge Navarro removed from the bench”? And other questions about donating funds to any of the imprisoned Defendants and their families or visiting them in prison. These government types wouldn’t know the first thing about donating to help out a neighbor! Their pocketbooks are glued shut, unless Hillary is up for election. Remember, all of the testimony given during this Proffering Session will NOT be heard by the Jury! Defense Witnesses are not being intimidated this time around. They want their voiced heard, even if it is in the Appeals Process!
URGENT! Roger Stone’s Petition is being blocked by Facebook, so you will have to go to Stone Cold Truth to sign it and remember to Share via email, and Social Media!
Courtroom Observers verify, the Prosecution officially rested their case today, under duress, but the Defense was successful at getting them to utter the words. Dennis Michael Lynch was also supposed to Proffer his testimony today, but Judge Navarro and the Prosecution, which is actually one in the same, decided not to let him testify, since last time he was a witness for the Prosecution. Courtroom Observers say that Lynch was definitely a hostile witness as his testimony was so damning to the Prosecution, therefore the government will not allow him to testify on the Defense’s behalf.
Courtroom Observers are predicting that the Judge will not allow the Defendants a defense. Judge Gloria Navarro told the Defendants, “you are not allowed a defense when you go up against Federal Officers”. Who gave this woman her law degree? I have to say she failed the part on the Constitution! Although we know they are no longer teaching the Constitution in Law School anymore, according to many personal witnesses.
Also, Ricky Lovelien was not in the courtroom today. He was in a holding cell with piped in sound so he could hear the proceedings. He received word last night that his nephew died of a prolonged illness. Ricky was so upset, he requested not to be present in court today. And I can understand that knowing the rules Judge Navarro has decreed for the Defendants and Observers. If he got emotional or fidgeted at any time, he would be ousted immediately and made a fool of by Judge Navarro. It was reported that this news had been kept from Ricky by the US Marshall’s.
Today’s court proceedings will be “Proffering” of the Defense Witnesses. Ken Rhodes, known as Orange Hat Man, testified via Skype. All we know right now is that Mr. Rhodes was asked a lot of questions like, “did you sign a petition to have Judge Navarro removed from the bench”? And other questions about donating funds to any of the imprisoned Defendants and their families or visiting them in prison. These government types wouldn’t know the first thing about donating to help out a neighbor! Their pocketbooks are glued shut, unless Hillary is up for election. Remember, all of the testimony given during this Proffering Session will NOT be heard by the Jury! Defense Witnesses are not being intimidated this time around. They want their voiced heard, even if it is in the Appeals Process!
URGENT! Roger Stone’s Petition is being blocked by Facebook, so you will have to go to Stone Cold Truth to sign it and remember to Share via email, and Social Media!
Courtroom Observers verify, the Prosecution officially rested their case today, under duress, but the Defense was successful at getting them to utter the words. Dennis Michael Lynch was also supposed to Proffer his testimony today, but Judge Navarro and the Prosecution, which is actually one in the same, decided not to let him testify, since last time he was a witness for the Prosecution. Courtroom Observers say that Lynch was definitely a hostile witness as his testimony was so damning to the Prosecution, therefore the government will not allow him to testify on the Defense’s behalf.
Courtroom Observers are predicting that the Judge will not allow the Defendants a defense. Judge Gloria Navarro told the Defendants, “you are not allowed a defense when you go up against Federal Officers”. Who gave this woman her law degree? I have to say she failed the part on the Constitution! Although we know they are no longer teaching the Constitution in Law School anymore, according to many personal witnesses.
Also, Ricky Lovelien was not in the courtroom today. He was in a holding cell with piped in sound so he could hear the proceedings. He received word last night that his nephew died of a prolonged illness. Ricky was so upset, he requested not to be present in court today. And I can understand that knowing the rules Judge Navarro has decreed for the Defendants and Observers. If he got emotional or fidgeted at any time, he would be ousted immediately and made a fool of by Judge Navarro. It was reported that this news had been kept from Ricky by the US Marshall’s.
August 8, 2017
Jury and Defense show up for proceedings today dressed in Black and Grey, signifying they are going to someone’s funeral!
The Government, Judge Gloria Navarro and the Defense continue to argue who will be allowed to testify for the Defense. It the case that the government has told the Defense they will determine IF their witnesses are worthy of testifying. The term that defines this process is “Proffer”, although the government/Navarro are taking this process way beyond the scope it was intended.
Today’s proceedings included the cross examination of Case Agent Joel Willis. Jess Marchese was first to approach the witness reminding the court that Eric Parker had not received his III% Of Idaho tattoo when he was protesting at Bundy Ranch. Marchese continued, “you had 279 in the wash and only 29 Officers. Did you count the Officers on the Northbound bridge”? Agent Willis told the court, “no, they did not”. Marchese asked, “were there any Officers on the Southbound bridge”? Agent Willis will not answer the question, and is not prodded by Judge Navarro to do so. Once again the government gets a pass! Marchese continued, “so, you didn’t count any officers on the Southbound bridge. Did you count any at Post-1”? Agent Willis is producing evidence for every protestor in the wash and on the bridge, but fails to including in his numbers All of the Officers on scene including the Officers at the ICP. Anyone who was there or has seen the photo and video evidence can testify to the fact that there were not only BLM/NPS. There were Nevada Highway Patrol. Las Vegas Metro/Clark County Sheriff’s Office and SWAT! At one point in Agent Willis’ testimony he testified to over 400 Protestors, but he was using multiple sources of photo and video evidence. The Protest in the wash lasted almost an hour, so people were migrating from the bridge to the wash and vise-versa. Remember, the majority of the Protestors were unarmed. Marchese then played the video Todd Engel filmed and posted to Facebook in which he said, “there are going to be gun battles today”. When Eric Parker was arrested, were there any ‘gun battles’”? Agent Willis admitted, “no, there wasn’t”. Marchese asked Agent Willis several questions about the Northbound and Southbound bridges, about erosion in the wash and wear and tare on I-15 and bushes. Agent Willis testified that, “no, there have been no changes in any of the conditions at the site since 2014”. Really! There have been no erosion on any of these due to rain, wind and cattle roaming the area? This guy is supposed to be an investigative conasuer, and he can’t even see the obvious! Even the Desert Tortoise probably blazed a trail through the wash or across the highway! Marchese displayed a photo genius Willis took with his 1.1" - 2.00" diameter, 4 foot long broom handle sticking through the concrete barrier on the Northbound bridge and asked, “so, there has been no erosion to the asphalt on the bridge between he time you snapped your photo and April 12, 2014”? Agent Willis told the court “no”, when courtroom observers have made their trek to the bridge during this trial and have witnessed this erosion themselves! Marchese also pointed out how you would be able to maneuver the broom handle better on the upper portion of the whole in the cement barrier than down lower were Parker had is firearm rested. Marchese also produced a photo and asked Agent Willis if he could see Parker’s firearm protruding out the other side of the barrier? Making the point that if you actually used Parker’s weapon for you “investigation” you would have not been able to turn that weapon even 20 degrees! And, at 20 - 30 degrees, as Willis testified, Marchese told him you would be practically shooting yourself! Remember the days when a Jury had questions while hearing or deliberating a case and they would go on a little “Field Trip” to the scene of the crime to they could witness for themselves the conditions and see how the implements would have been used, how the body was left laying at the site? This Jury needs to be brought to this site so they can see for themselves and not have to rely on the governments claims. The government has Parker’s and Stewart’s weapons! They could demonstrate this on site! It’s time for a Field Trip people! In this next line of questioning, Marchese shows a photo of Parker on the bridge down below the jersey barrier after the Bureau Of Land Management and the National Parks Service threatened the group with deadly force. Agent Willis gave testimony as to how many inches Parker’s eyes were off the ground and how far away his face was from the concrete barrier. Of course this as only a guess. Here we go again! Remember when during an investigation a dummy would have been produced, size, shape and weight of the individual, and placed at the scene in the exact position so measurement and photos could be taken to reconstruct the facts? Well, this is to much to ask the government to do, because we are just asked to believe any load of crap they throw at us! Any honest Judge would throw this evidence out of court and send them back to do the job right or hire someone who will!
The Government, Judge Gloria Navarro and the Defense continue to argue who will be allowed to testify for the Defense. It the case that the government has told the Defense they will determine IF their witnesses are worthy of testifying. The term that defines this process is “Proffer”, although the government/Navarro are taking this process way beyond the scope it was intended.
Today’s proceedings included the cross examination of Case Agent Joel Willis. Jess Marchese was first to approach the witness reminding the court that Eric Parker had not received his III% Of Idaho tattoo when he was protesting at Bundy Ranch. Marchese continued, “you had 279 in the wash and only 29 Officers. Did you count the Officers on the Northbound bridge”? Agent Willis told the court, “no, they did not”. Marchese asked, “were there any Officers on the Southbound bridge”? Agent Willis will not answer the question, and is not prodded by Judge Navarro to do so. Once again the government gets a pass! Marchese continued, “so, you didn’t count any officers on the Southbound bridge. Did you count any at Post-1”? Agent Willis is producing evidence for every protestor in the wash and on the bridge, but fails to including in his numbers All of the Officers on scene including the Officers at the ICP. Anyone who was there or has seen the photo and video evidence can testify to the fact that there were not only BLM/NPS. There were Nevada Highway Patrol. Las Vegas Metro/Clark County Sheriff’s Office and SWAT! At one point in Agent Willis’ testimony he testified to over 400 Protestors, but he was using multiple sources of photo and video evidence. The Protest in the wash lasted almost an hour, so people were migrating from the bridge to the wash and vise-versa. Remember, the majority of the Protestors were unarmed. Marchese then played the video Todd Engel filmed and posted to Facebook in which he said, “there are going to be gun battles today”. When Eric Parker was arrested, were there any ‘gun battles’”? Agent Willis admitted, “no, there wasn’t”. Marchese asked Agent Willis several questions about the Northbound and Southbound bridges, about erosion in the wash and wear and tare on I-15 and bushes. Agent Willis testified that, “no, there have been no changes in any of the conditions at the site since 2014”. Really! There have been no erosion on any of these due to rain, wind and cattle roaming the area? This guy is supposed to be an investigative conasuer, and he can’t even see the obvious! Even the Desert Tortoise probably blazed a trail through the wash or across the highway! Marchese displayed a photo genius Willis took with his 1.1" - 2.00" diameter, 4 foot long broom handle sticking through the concrete barrier on the Northbound bridge and asked, “so, there has been no erosion to the asphalt on the bridge between he time you snapped your photo and April 12, 2014”? Agent Willis told the court “no”, when courtroom observers have made their trek to the bridge during this trial and have witnessed this erosion themselves! Marchese also pointed out how you would be able to maneuver the broom handle better on the upper portion of the whole in the cement barrier than down lower were Parker had is firearm rested. Marchese also produced a photo and asked Agent Willis if he could see Parker’s firearm protruding out the other side of the barrier? Making the point that if you actually used Parker’s weapon for you “investigation” you would have not been able to turn that weapon even 20 degrees! And, at 20 - 30 degrees, as Willis testified, Marchese told him you would be practically shooting yourself! Remember the days when a Jury had questions while hearing or deliberating a case and they would go on a little “Field Trip” to the scene of the crime to they could witness for themselves the conditions and see how the implements would have been used, how the body was left laying at the site? This Jury needs to be brought to this site so they can see for themselves and not have to rely on the governments claims. The government has Parker’s and Stewart’s weapons! They could demonstrate this on site! It’s time for a Field Trip people! In this next line of questioning, Marchese shows a photo of Parker on the bridge down below the jersey barrier after the Bureau Of Land Management and the National Parks Service threatened the group with deadly force. Agent Willis gave testimony as to how many inches Parker’s eyes were off the ground and how far away his face was from the concrete barrier. Of course this as only a guess. Here we go again! Remember when during an investigation a dummy would have been produced, size, shape and weight of the individual, and placed at the scene in the exact position so measurement and photos could be taken to reconstruct the facts? Well, this is to much to ask the government to do, because we are just asked to believe any load of crap they throw at us! Any honest Judge would throw this evidence out of court and send them back to do the job right or hire someone who will!
 | |
| View from I-15 Northbound Bridge into the wash Bunkerville Nevada. Click Photo To Watch "View Between the Jersey Barrier". |
Todd Leventhal was next to approach the witness and said, “you put yellow boxes with names in these pictures, do you have any information that Scott Drexler was in communication with any of these people? Showing a photo in which Ryan Payne, Ryan Bundy and Dave Bundy have been “squared up” with Agent Willis’ yellow box. Leventhal then asked the same question asking about Todd Engel having any communication with him? The Defense showed the video interview of Ammon and Lisa Bundy being interviewed by Stewart Rhodes and a local Journalist, which I posted below. They asked, “were Ammon/Lisa Facebook friends with Stewart Rhodes? Did they have any conversations over the phone or recordings”? Agent Willis answered, “no, none at this time”. Leventhal then produced another photo of a man next to someone from the media with a pen and a pad of paper and asked Willis, “do you know this person with the tan hat”? To which Agent Willis gave his childish answer, “well, I was told only to focus on people with guns”. The Prosecution objected to this, but Leventhal was able to continue with his questioning of Willis, maybe Judge Navarro was in a sugar coma at the time she let this one slip by. Leventhal continue to show several photos asking about people with cameras and long lenses that could be mistaken for guns at great distances. The Prosecution, once again, objected to this by saying it was irrelevant and argumentative. The Prosecution claims that the Defense is limited to talking about what the Defendants alone did, nothing else. Leventhal went on with his questioning using more photos of the Agents behind a tree but their trucks visible, proving the fact that Agent Willis’ exhibits leave out evidence of the armed Officers/Agents pointing their weapons at the Protestors, trying to conceal the truth about what went on in the wash April 12, 2014. Leventhal played a video, to which the Prosecution objected to. Leventhal wants the audio played along with the video, but the government wants to keep the audio out of the evidence because, once again, they are trying to conceal the truth! Judge Navarro sustained the objection so Leventhal went on to question Agent Willis about other photos saying, “the photos you took are misleading”.
The Jury submitted questions again today, but they were read BEFORE lunch break so Agent Willis could spend his lunch hour planning the way he would answer the Jury. These people can’t win without cheating, and if they come up the looser, are poor sports about it. So after lunch the following questions were answered by Agent Willis, with a little help from Judge Navarro. Question number one, “why are others with guns not labeled”? Agent Willis told the Jury, “I was focusing this case on the Defendants that pose a threat to Law Enforcement”. The Defense Moved to strike the answer and the request was granted, although the Jury still heard the answer. Next question, “based on the gap, how many degrees from side to side could a weapon move”? Agent Willis told the Jury, “20 degrees”. Next, “will the exhibit list be provided to the Jury”? Answer, “yes”. The next question asked by the Jury was not read. It was said to be to “damning”. Next, “what was the reason to have the FBI surveilling the area”? It was determined by Judge Navarro not to be relevant, so no answer was given. Next, “if the BLM was in charge of the ICP (Incident Command Post) at what point did the FBI get involved”? Again, Judge Navarro refuses the question be answered, because we know the FBI was involved in January of 2-14 BEFORE the BLM got involved in April of that same year. Next the Jury asked, “how much lateral movement side to side in the barrier”? Agent Willis repeated his previous answer, “20 degrees, but could be greater depending on the size of the barrel”. Well you should know genius! You could have proved it as fact! Since you have the weapon and could have gone to the scene and performed a test on video and showed the results as evidence in this trial! The Jury then asked about “vertical movement” in the barrier, and Willis told the Jury “this would not change”, even though it is a slit no a round hole! Next asked, “why didn’t you take support when you went out with the range finding equipment”? Agent Willis said “I took five others out with me with the range finder but not when I took the photos”. Next question, “did you calibrate the range finders”? Agent Willis used two separate range finders in his “investigation”. One was new, the other had been around for a while. And why not go out and buy a brand new one when you already have a perfectly good one? But, it’s on the tax payers dime, so go for it! He said, “I asked the store employees, and felt it was not necessary to calibrate something that was brand new, other than to send it back to the manufacturer and have them do it”. Agent Willis was then asked if “he used GPS”? Willis responded, “I did not have access to GPS equipment”. Which is a crock! Because government is using that technology to track us wherever we go no matter what we are doing! I’m sure there’s an app for that! Next the Jury asked Willis, “are the bridges exactly parallel”? Agent Willis told the Jury, “yes”. Now I pass over those bridges at least 4 times a year, and I know they are not! Again, this could be proved on the spot with a Field Trip to the I-15 bridges. Heck! Take the Party Bus! The Jury then asked about "a post Steven Stewart made on Facebook saying 'they pushed forward' but they remained stationary on the bridge”? Agent Willis answered “yes that is true, but they were not in the wash and they were not stationary. They ran away and then came back with a backpack full of water”. Yikes! An explosive situation! The Jury then asked, “did you witness Ricky Lovelien point a weapon at any time”? Agent Willis answered, “no”. Next, “410 people in the wash. So how many of them were women? How many were children? How many were media? And, how many were armed”? Agent Willis told the Jury he did not count the different groups, but I know there were 41 armed. 26 were in the wash and everyone else was on the bridge”. Next, they asked, “how many militia”? Willis did not have an answer. Next, “Mr. Willis testified that the upper part of the gap veers to the right, but was not shown in the photos. Was this correct”? Once again, this could be answered this week with a Field Trip to the site! Agent Willis had trouble answering this truthfully. The Jury then asked, “would one have a wider view at the bottom of the slit in the cement barrier”? Agent doesn’t know his A$$ from his nose but answered , “yes”, although earlier he testified to the opposite!. “So, would one be able to move more freely at the bottom of the gap”? Once again, Willis answered “yes”. Next, “based on your review, did Scott of Steven have any direct communication with anyone, other than the Defendants, that rallied for or organized a Bundy Protest before that date in question”? Agent Willis cannot recall, “but, Steven Stewart and Scott Drexler traveled to Nevada with Eric Parker and that would infer that they all communicated together”. When the question was drilled down on, Willis had to answer “no”. The Jury asked for exact times and dates Agent Willis went out to the site on I-15 but was unable to provide them to the Jury. It was determined to be “irrelevant”. This ended the questioning by the Juror’s.
The Prosecution did some damage control by re-directing the witness testimony of Agent Willis. Telling the Jury there are many times Ricky Lovelien was not on film, but we’re using the non-evidence as evidence against him. You can’t make this stuff up! Further telling the Jury the Defense can not account for him at those times. It’s because he is seen in the video footage as he hangs out with Todd Leventhal and the NHP. That’s not proof?
Jess Marchese stepped up next to address Agent Willis saying, “the question on the line of sight, that 20 degrees, that’s a guess right? And, you talked about the bridges being parallel. There is seven feet difference in those numbers you recorded with your range finder on each bridge.” He next said, “you labeled people with guns, saying you were focused on people from this case”? Marchese produced the photo of Ryan Payne, Ryan Bundy and Dave Bundy, to which Judge Navarro and the Prosecution claimed that it was “misleading”. Leventhal told the government, “if you’d like a side bar? I say that it is the other way around! His answer to this question is misleading! So if you’d like to discuss it in a side bar, I’d be happy to do that”. Judge Navarro would not call a side bar. The Defense continued by asking Agent Willis to state the number of the militia, the media etc. Then the Prosecution again claimed he was being misleading. The two sides bantered about this objection with the Defense stating, “he is being misleading in his answers”. It’s a bit frustrating being left without the answers, but I’m working with what I’ve got! The Defense then asked Agent Willis “if any of the photos or videos were enhanced”? Willis answering, “no, the FBI never enhances anything”. “Well, are you sure these photos or videos were not enhanced before you got them? You are pulling media off of Facebook, off of media sources, you’re pulling media off of, who knows were? We don’t even know who took those photos”? There is no real answer given, but we all know there the FBI has no proof they weren’t edited or enhanced!
It was announced that court will not begin until 10:00 a.m. and the Jury will not be showing up at all. Judge Gloria Navarro tried to trick the Defense into giving their 29a Motions BEFORE the government has officially finalized their case. What the government has to do is PROVE that the charges should stick. If there is a Conspiracy charge, the government should have proof (beyond a reasonable doubt). The burden of proof falls on the Prosecution. Judge Navarro is trying to get coax the Defense into filing this Motion before the government rests so it will give them time to drum up and argument that a conspiracy exists, since they couldn’t do it in the weeks they’ve had to present their case. And this goes to any of the other charges. The proceedings moved forward with discussion of Witnesses who will be testifying for the Defense tomorrow. A Patricia Kent is on the list. Through some questioning, it is disclosed what she will be testifying to, and Judge Navarro tells the Defense she will not be allowed to testify! Judge Navarro allows her to “Proffer” her testimony, but it will only be heard by the Judge and Prosecutors, the Jury will not be allowed to hear it. Dennis Michael Lynch will also “Proffer” his testimony tomorrow via Skype since he has been under medical treatment and is unable to travel. Word from the Court Observers is that Judge Navarro will not allow any testimony from the Defense in front of the Jury! It is still not known weather Eric Parker, or any of the Defendants, will be able to testify for their own defense. So, the couch-sitters who said they would come to court to support the Defendants during defense testimony will not have a change, because the Judge has denyed the Defense a witness! All we can hope for is that the Jury alone has seen the truth through this smokescreen, and Acquit these Defendants and set them free! Courtroom Observers are concerned about the Jury’s opinion of Eric Parker though. Their questions have not concerned him as they have the other three men. They are concerned that they have already convicted Eric and will send him to prison for a longer term than murderers and rapists! Over 20 Years! At the very least. We need witnesses in the Courtroom to see this injustice that is going on! We can use this testimony against these government criminals later.
August 7, 2017
Today almost all of the Jury Members were dressed in red, or shades of red. The Defense asked Judge Gloria Navarro why? She went on a long diatribe explaining why the Jury should not address this question. On two other occasions the Jury dressed alike. One I reported on earlier in which the Jury dressed almost totally in Green, another time when they dressed all in Blue, which was not noted in any of the reports I investigated. One point that was noticed by the spectators, yet not mentioned by the court, was that the US Marshal sitting next to the jury box was wearing a dark red tie, perfectly coordinated with the jury. I am going to take another flying leap here and verbalize my opinion on these shenanigans. Could it be that this is the Jury's was of signaling to the Judge where they stand as to convicting these men? We know from the report by ReDoubt News, in the link above, that the Judge knows as least those who are not sympathetic to the Defendants. Could it be that the ones in Red have their minds made up, guilt or innocence either way, It seems like the Jury is sympathetic but you never know, and those in "shades of red" are undecided, and the ones not wearing red have already decided in the opposite direction? I heard after my first post tonight that tomorrow the Jury and the Defense were dressed in Black and shades of Gray! I'll have that in my update when transcribed tomorrow.
Today’s court session began with Agent Joel Willis, Case Agent for the Bundy Cases, on the stand. Agent Willis continued to enter evidence already produced by previous witnesses and footage from 8 News Now, Las Vegas Review Journal, Citizens Action Network and more. Agent Willis adds photos of Eric and Steven prone on the bridge from multiple angles, trying to overwhelm the Jury with evidence on the men hoping the Jury will convict on just the amount of photo evidence alone. The Prosecution, through Agent Willis’ evidence continue to bring Todd Engel into the case, this time bringing in videos and Facebook post from Engel. Agent Willis is asked to cherry-pick statements from Eric Parkers cross examination from the previous trial, Willis only reading statements where Parker agrees with the Prosecution and, seemingly, self incriminating statements, nothing from his testimony during Defense testimony. Why is the Judge allowing the Prosecution witnesses to do this knowing Eric Parker will testify on his own behalf again in this trial? Next the Prosecution presented evidence of a March 3, 2016 Todd Engel video made after Eric Parker was arrested, calling Parker “the head of the resistance” further saying, “the feds have cut off the head of the resistance”. The video was not played in court in its entirety, but only portions containing the above statements and the phrase, “there are going to be gun battles today”. The Prosecution also presented a video not seen by many of the courtroom observers of and interview Ammon and Lisa Bundy did with Stewart Rhodes. I’ve seen the video and I think the portion the Prosecution is going to focus on is where Ammon tells Rhodes that both the Bureau Of Land Management and the Protestors where pressing the gate, both sides heated and they had arms. Nothing else in the video would be useful to the prosecution, maybe only that there was a plan as to how to proceed and that the Protest is a model as to how to take a stand and to get things done. Otherwise it was very damning to the BLM, very complimentary to Tom Roberts the Sheriff Deputy that helped mediate the deescalation. Ammon also told about how he asked Tom Roberts if he could personally lay down the cattle guards as a political statement. While presenting his evidence today Agent Willis continually repeated the phrase “this is when the people pressed forward” trying to make the Jury think the Protestors were the aggressors. Ammon’s account in the video interview rebuts that statement and the terms mostly used were “moved forward" and "moved back” in witness accounts.
With less than an hour left for cross examination, because of Agent Willis’ longwinded presentation of his made up timeline and repetitive photo and video evidence, here is how it went. Richard Tanasi first objected to a man being shown in a photo Willis produced standing next to Eric Parker in which a tagline is circulated saying, “was he arrested that day”, the photo depicts the Officer looking at Parker. Steven Myhre objected to that stating relevance. Tanasi stated, “it goes against the charges against these. They were charged with behavior that would warrant arrest, so I am asking if any arrests were made that day”. Judge Gloria Navarro became very agitated and quipped “objection sustained, move on”! Tanasi them showed several photos of other people kneeling down on the bridge by Parker and Stewart. He then asked Agent Willis to compare his microscopic photo of the area that resembled ants and asked Willis to tell us if you can see Stewart wearing a blue shirt in your photo indicated by a yellow box. Although Willis tried to weasel out of this one he could not clearing show Stewart in the blue shirt. Tanasi also provided photo evidence that Steven Stewart did not have binoculars, but that other people in close proximity had binoculars. Also, photos of Nevada Highway Patrol on the bridge was depicted in several photos Tanasi presented. Tanasi also pointed out a discrepancy in a Facebook post Steven Stewart had made, while Stewart said "the cattle are free”, it wasn’t until about an hour later they were actually fee. Stewart may have just been announcing the fact that the announcement had been made on the stage to set the cattle free. We all know it took a while to negotiate the BLM backing down. Tanasi also pointed out to Agent Willis that Stewart does not have an earpiece and he’s not standing with certain people. Tanasi asked Agent Willis, “was Steven Stewart at a Rally at 4:00 that night”? This drew objection from the Prosecution. Tanasi told the court, “that’s ok, I’ll go about it a different way”, continueing, “this is your summary, and it is comprised of everything that is important in this case, and there are no pictures of these men at that 4:00 meeting”.
Shawn Perez rose and played for the court the video played in the previous trial of Todd Engel interacting with the Nevada Highway Patrol for about 20 minutes, along with Ricky Lovelien, in which Todd brings the NHP to the edge of the bridge and is seen pointing to the armed Agents of the BLM/NPS and Ricky sitting on the cement barrier with his firearm but never pointing it. As Agent Willis testified to “range”, and Perez shot holes in his testimony has Willis was never at the wash until he visited the scene two years later when the government decided it would round everyone up who was at the Bunkerville Protest. Agent Willis tried to defend his position of how he calculated his timeline by using a bush in the wash that was there in 2016 that may not have been there in 2014 when the Protest took place. The Prosecution objected as Perez was using video evidence to show that Ricky Lovelien never took his weapon out of the sling, saying “this goes beyond the scope”, telling the Judge they can’t enter the video again since its already been played, “they should have questioned it at that time”. Perez advocating that Willis testified that he sat on the jersey barrier with his weapon on his lap. Judge Navarro had to backtrack, looking at the transcript to see if it had been mentioned earlier in the proceedings and determined it had. The Judge allows Perez to continue making his point, so the video is played to backup the fact that Lovelien did not un-sling his weapon, shooting another hole in Agent Willis’ testimony. “YES”! (Take that Willis! We got ya). Perez ended with asking Agent Willis, “so you cannot say with complete certainty that Ricky Lovelien could see the trucks from his direction”? Other key points that were made during this portion of the cross examination were the fact that Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien were further down the road that the governments testimony showed. And, it was discovered that Agent Willis used a broomstick handle instead of a firearm as the same type, heck- they have Parker and Stewart's firearms in their possession yet didn’t use them, to determine how far the barrel could penetrate the whole in the cement barrier on the bridge. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit"! This ended proceedings for today.
We must be reminded that the Prosecution said they would rest their case after Agent Willis’ return to the stand. There is still two other Attorneys and the Juror questions, but this should end this portion of the proceedings. Everyone is waiting to see if the rumor holds true that the Defense Witnesses will have to proffer meaning, the party with the burden of proof must produce sufficient evidence to cary that burden. The way if works in Judge Navarro’s court is the Defense Witnesses have to meet behind closed doors in front of the Prosecuting Attorneys and the Judge, give their testimony, then the Prosecution and Judge Navarro will decide if they have supporting evidence and this will determine if they are ALLOWED to testify! This is how the Defendants only ended up with two witnesses including Eric Parkers testimony. They will also play the same trick they played last trial threatening the Defense Witnesses with prosecution if they testify, witness tampering in full view of all on-lookers. Courtroom Observers are reporting that the witness intimidation tactics deployed during that previous trial are already underway now. It would be nice if we had witnesses that wouldn’t be intimidated this time around.
Today’s court session began with Agent Joel Willis, Case Agent for the Bundy Cases, on the stand. Agent Willis continued to enter evidence already produced by previous witnesses and footage from 8 News Now, Las Vegas Review Journal, Citizens Action Network and more. Agent Willis adds photos of Eric and Steven prone on the bridge from multiple angles, trying to overwhelm the Jury with evidence on the men hoping the Jury will convict on just the amount of photo evidence alone. The Prosecution, through Agent Willis’ evidence continue to bring Todd Engel into the case, this time bringing in videos and Facebook post from Engel. Agent Willis is asked to cherry-pick statements from Eric Parkers cross examination from the previous trial, Willis only reading statements where Parker agrees with the Prosecution and, seemingly, self incriminating statements, nothing from his testimony during Defense testimony. Why is the Judge allowing the Prosecution witnesses to do this knowing Eric Parker will testify on his own behalf again in this trial? Next the Prosecution presented evidence of a March 3, 2016 Todd Engel video made after Eric Parker was arrested, calling Parker “the head of the resistance” further saying, “the feds have cut off the head of the resistance”. The video was not played in court in its entirety, but only portions containing the above statements and the phrase, “there are going to be gun battles today”. The Prosecution also presented a video not seen by many of the courtroom observers of and interview Ammon and Lisa Bundy did with Stewart Rhodes. I’ve seen the video and I think the portion the Prosecution is going to focus on is where Ammon tells Rhodes that both the Bureau Of Land Management and the Protestors where pressing the gate, both sides heated and they had arms. Nothing else in the video would be useful to the prosecution, maybe only that there was a plan as to how to proceed and that the Protest is a model as to how to take a stand and to get things done. Otherwise it was very damning to the BLM, very complimentary to Tom Roberts the Sheriff Deputy that helped mediate the deescalation. Ammon also told about how he asked Tom Roberts if he could personally lay down the cattle guards as a political statement. While presenting his evidence today Agent Willis continually repeated the phrase “this is when the people pressed forward” trying to make the Jury think the Protestors were the aggressors. Ammon’s account in the video interview rebuts that statement and the terms mostly used were “moved forward" and "moved back” in witness accounts.
Deescalation & BLM Abuse At Bundy Ranch
A Firsthand Account by Ammon & Lisa Bundy
The Video Played In Court Today
With less than an hour left for cross examination, because of Agent Willis’ longwinded presentation of his made up timeline and repetitive photo and video evidence, here is how it went. Richard Tanasi first objected to a man being shown in a photo Willis produced standing next to Eric Parker in which a tagline is circulated saying, “was he arrested that day”, the photo depicts the Officer looking at Parker. Steven Myhre objected to that stating relevance. Tanasi stated, “it goes against the charges against these. They were charged with behavior that would warrant arrest, so I am asking if any arrests were made that day”. Judge Gloria Navarro became very agitated and quipped “objection sustained, move on”! Tanasi them showed several photos of other people kneeling down on the bridge by Parker and Stewart. He then asked Agent Willis to compare his microscopic photo of the area that resembled ants and asked Willis to tell us if you can see Stewart wearing a blue shirt in your photo indicated by a yellow box. Although Willis tried to weasel out of this one he could not clearing show Stewart in the blue shirt. Tanasi also provided photo evidence that Steven Stewart did not have binoculars, but that other people in close proximity had binoculars. Also, photos of Nevada Highway Patrol on the bridge was depicted in several photos Tanasi presented. Tanasi also pointed out a discrepancy in a Facebook post Steven Stewart had made, while Stewart said "the cattle are free”, it wasn’t until about an hour later they were actually fee. Stewart may have just been announcing the fact that the announcement had been made on the stage to set the cattle free. We all know it took a while to negotiate the BLM backing down. Tanasi also pointed out to Agent Willis that Stewart does not have an earpiece and he’s not standing with certain people. Tanasi asked Agent Willis, “was Steven Stewart at a Rally at 4:00 that night”? This drew objection from the Prosecution. Tanasi told the court, “that’s ok, I’ll go about it a different way”, continueing, “this is your summary, and it is comprised of everything that is important in this case, and there are no pictures of these men at that 4:00 meeting”.
Shawn Perez rose and played for the court the video played in the previous trial of Todd Engel interacting with the Nevada Highway Patrol for about 20 minutes, along with Ricky Lovelien, in which Todd brings the NHP to the edge of the bridge and is seen pointing to the armed Agents of the BLM/NPS and Ricky sitting on the cement barrier with his firearm but never pointing it. As Agent Willis testified to “range”, and Perez shot holes in his testimony has Willis was never at the wash until he visited the scene two years later when the government decided it would round everyone up who was at the Bunkerville Protest. Agent Willis tried to defend his position of how he calculated his timeline by using a bush in the wash that was there in 2016 that may not have been there in 2014 when the Protest took place. The Prosecution objected as Perez was using video evidence to show that Ricky Lovelien never took his weapon out of the sling, saying “this goes beyond the scope”, telling the Judge they can’t enter the video again since its already been played, “they should have questioned it at that time”. Perez advocating that Willis testified that he sat on the jersey barrier with his weapon on his lap. Judge Navarro had to backtrack, looking at the transcript to see if it had been mentioned earlier in the proceedings and determined it had. The Judge allows Perez to continue making his point, so the video is played to backup the fact that Lovelien did not un-sling his weapon, shooting another hole in Agent Willis’ testimony. “YES”! (Take that Willis! We got ya). Perez ended with asking Agent Willis, “so you cannot say with complete certainty that Ricky Lovelien could see the trucks from his direction”? Other key points that were made during this portion of the cross examination were the fact that Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien were further down the road that the governments testimony showed. And, it was discovered that Agent Willis used a broomstick handle instead of a firearm as the same type, heck- they have Parker and Stewart's firearms in their possession yet didn’t use them, to determine how far the barrel could penetrate the whole in the cement barrier on the bridge. "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit"! This ended proceedings for today.
We must be reminded that the Prosecution said they would rest their case after Agent Willis’ return to the stand. There is still two other Attorneys and the Juror questions, but this should end this portion of the proceedings. Everyone is waiting to see if the rumor holds true that the Defense Witnesses will have to proffer meaning, the party with the burden of proof must produce sufficient evidence to cary that burden. The way if works in Judge Navarro’s court is the Defense Witnesses have to meet behind closed doors in front of the Prosecuting Attorneys and the Judge, give their testimony, then the Prosecution and Judge Navarro will decide if they have supporting evidence and this will determine if they are ALLOWED to testify! This is how the Defendants only ended up with two witnesses including Eric Parkers testimony. They will also play the same trick they played last trial threatening the Defense Witnesses with prosecution if they testify, witness tampering in full view of all on-lookers. Courtroom Observers are reporting that the witness intimidation tactics deployed during that previous trial are already underway now. It would be nice if we had witnesses that wouldn’t be intimidated this time around.
August 3, 2017
When we left you yesterday, Todd Leventhal had motioned for a Miss-Trial. Today the court answered, because Judge Navarro had to “hit the books” in order to finagle a way out of granting it. If a Miss-Trial is going to be called, it will be on her terms. Here is the Government’s response, “the government clearly intends to put the mindset of the Defendants on trial”, but they can’t defend it. This is the government’s excuse for bringing in Facebook, Idaho III%, Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine. They don’t have anything to do with April 12, 2014. The Government has forbidden the Defendants from bringing any evidence accept for that which took place on April 12, 2014, but the Prosecution can toss in everything but the kitchen sink! The Prosecution, at this point, is trying to justify their use of reference to Timothy McVeigh, saying, “this proves the mindset”. And if you watched my two videos on my last post you will connect the dots. The Prosecution (Nadia Ahmed) said, “there is not much difference from what McVeigh did and what these guys did by being on a bridge with guns stopping Federal Agents”. The government is saying that what these men did was as bad as the Oklahoma City Bombing where 176 died, 83 were hospitalized, and 759 sustained injuries, WHEN NOT ONE SHOT WAS FIRED at Bunkerville!
Todd Leventhal gave a rebuttal to Ahmed saying, “it’s not the fact that you read the post mentioning McVeigh, it’s that you misrepresented it and elicited more testimony from Agent Sarah Draper asking that she define who McVeigh was and what he did”. When everyone should do their research and find out that McVeigh was the fall guy, and testimony from a prison confidant tells us he’s not really dead! Ahmed responded, “explaining the allowed exhibit is allowed in court”. There was a lot of back and fourth in arguing this point.
Jess Marchese stood to argue, “what Eric Parker said 18 months after the fact has nothing to to with 18 months before. Refer back to the Indictment. Idaho III%, Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine are not included”! Judge Gloria Navarro answered by saying, “the government has to pick and choose what the government decides to prosecute or not”. Trying to say that it’s not part of the Indictment, but we are going to prosecute it anyway. A “403 Balancing Test” was brought up at this point, which after research is described as, “Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice Confusion, Waste of Time or other”. Ahmed for the Prosecution stated, “this is not a 404 B”, which from my research is “Character Evidence, Crimes and Other Acts”.
Todd Leventhal got back up and said, “if the government wants to talk mind-set. Why is the Defense unable to talk about it”? At this point the reporter fails to report a ruling, so court moves forward with cross examination of Agent Sarah Draper.
Jess Marchese questioned Agent Draper about a video link in a Facebook post that said, “does anyone know anyone in the Nevada militia”? Which absolutely had no responses.
Todd Leventhal questioned Agent Draper about a Facebook posts from Scott Drexler mentioning, “one is from MSNBC, one is from Reuters etc.”, you are using what these news agencies said against Mr. Drexler. Saying to Agent Draper, “you personally got on to Scott Drexler’s page and took screen-shots of public posts. You testified that other agents would take these screen-shots and get them to you”? Agent Draper rebutted by saying, “employees NOT Agents”. She repeated this phrase correcting the Defense time after time. Which begs the question. Is an Informant an employee? Since he receives a government paycheck. Leventhal then asked Agent Draper, “where you aware of anyone arrested in Oregon”? The question received an Objection and Judge Navarro immediately called a side bar, just one of many today, and they were extremely long! The objection was sustained so Leventhal went to another question, “were you aware of Mr. Drexler pointing his gun at anyone? Are you aware of Mr. Drexler demanding anything from anyone in Oregon? Do you know how long Mr. Drexler was in Oregon? Have you ever had any dealings with the III% of Idaho”? This received an objection it was sustained. Leventhal continued, “after 2012 have you had any dealings with the III% of Idaho”? This drew another objection that resulted in a side bar. Returning from the side bar Leventhal asked, “did you in your law enforcement capacity have any dealings with the Idaho III%”? Which also received an objection. Leventhal finished with re-establishing the fact that she was the lead investigator in regards to Stewart, Drexler and Parker. Agent Draper told the court she had 5 -6 employees working with her. Agent Draper is asked how Eric Parker’s post appears on Scott Drexler’s page? Agent Draper falsely tells the court that every “tag” must be approved by the person in it, but this is only selected as an option in the Facebook Settings. Agent Draper produced photo evidence of a screen-shot of the post in question. Visible in the screen-shot is evidence the “employee” who took the screen-shot has four mutual friends with Scott Drexler. By the process of deduction two of those were Eric Parker and Steven Stewart, the other two, we’re not sure of. Leventhal asked Draper, “can your ‘employees’ communicate with these men online”? Agent draper insists that “they cannot”, she must not know anything about Facebook! Leventhal brought up an example trying to prove his point that these men could have been goaded into responding to something in a certain way, showing Agent Draper a post by an individual who posted, “be careful, bridges can be choke points”.
The Prosecution went forward with re-direct asking Agent Draper, “to your knowledge do you know of any of these government ‘employees’ working undercover and coerced any information from the Defendants”? Draper’s response, “not to my knowledge”.
Next up were the Jury questions, since Judge Navarro has invited them to ask questions. First up, “are you looking at any other sources other than Facebook”? No answer is reported by the courtroom observer. Next, “was your ‘team’ looking at Eric, Steve and Scott before April 12, 2014”? Agent Draper answered, “no, we weren’t”. Another question, “when did you start your investigation on these men”? Draper responded, “I can’t answer that”. The next Juror asked, “were the posts only visible to friends only or visible to anyone who looked at the page”? Again, the reporter fails to give an answer! Next, “Draper testified that post were pulled from ‘public viewable content’. Would becoming a friend with that person make the post publicly viewable content”? Agent Draper, at this time, changed her previous testimony saying, “becoming a friend of a person does not make their content ‘publicly viewable’, and that some of the evidence entered today was not publicly viewable. There was no Search Warrant and was harvested by a government paid ‘employee/informant’ that was friends with these men on Facebook”. Another question, “would the picture attached to the Facebook post be visible in the Facebook Warrant Return”? This had to do with the fact that only the text these men wrote was visible, the rest of the screen-shot was redacted to conceal the informants identity. The next question was, “in order for a friend to be on Facebook, does that action have to be approved by both parties”? The reporter failed to give Agent Draper’s response. Next question, “were you given training on looking at Facebook Returns or dealing with Facebook Returns”? Draper tells the Jury, “only by experience”. The next question had to deal with the Facebook Search Warrant, the date and time and period it was active for. Next the Jury asked Agent Draper, “do you have a way of determining who posted what post, such as a friend, wife or husband”? Agent Draper responded, “no, you could give out your login name and password and anyone could post for you”. The next question had to do with an exhibit of a post, the Jury asked if Eric Parker had made the comment on the bottom of the post. Agent Draper had to answer “no, it was a shared post”. A Jury member asked about “the scope” and was told it would be addressed in the legal instruction. What this question was dealing with was why are we hearing evidence of Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine if it was not included in the Indictment? The government had a meeting when the Jury left the courtroom for lunch and their claim is that Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine “are furtherance of the conspiracy”. Jess Marchese and Todd Leventhal argued that the Indictment included cattle, Cliven Bundy and extorting Federal Officers from executing a Court Order in Nevada. It has nothing to do with Sugar Pine Mine or White Hope Mine. Judge Gloria Navarro told the Defense Attorneys “it is included”. Leventhal asked Judge Navarro to show them in the testimony of the Grand Jury where it says anything about these Protests? Judge Navarro says it includes these and other groups and individuals like Schuyler Barbeau and Blaine Cooper because they were present at Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine.
We return to more Jury questions, “at what point do you consider a post relevant enough to be viewed by you personally, rather than by one of your paid employees”. Agent Draper rambled on and on really saying nothing of relevance but ended up exposing the fact she knows nothing about Facebook. Another question, “did your ‘agents’ deliberately engage in conversation to get the Defendants to incriminate themselves”? Draper, “no”. The Jury asked a question about “UTC”, (Common Universal Time). There was no answer reported. At this time Todd Leventhal asked for a side bar. These side bars are done out of earshot of the Jury and Courtroom Observers, so we don’t know what was discussed or what the result was. Court continued with more Jury questions including questions about Meta Data and the investigation to which Agent Draper responded she didn’t really know. The next Juror asked about the guidelines for redacting a post. Judge Navarro decided to answer this one herself saying, “any redaction on the post the parties do not agree upon, I make that decision”, because we all know she’s working for the Prosecution!
Todd Leventhal then questioned Agent Sarah Draper about how accepting a friend request works saying, “if your agents are not coercing these men into conversation, are they not coercing them into having friendship on Facebook by making their account look like someone they would be friends with”? This really becomes curious because someone like Ricky Lovelien is hardly ever on Facebook and may be easily “coerced” into a friendship with someone he doesn’t really know. This drew objection that resulted in another side bar. Leventhal returned asking, “in order to be a friend you have to have a Facebook Account, and the agents made their own accounts, and if they set up their own accounts and you’re not with them all the time, how do you know they are not coercing them, they would be created to look enticing when seen by someone like Scott Drexler they would approve them”? Agent Draper responded, “yes, one of our employees did become a friend of Drexler. We know of one employee that was a friend of Drexler. There was an alias account created, but that was long before he became a friend with Drexler. It being an existing account”. Agent Draper was then asked if she was involved in making the account or how much she knew about the account”? Responding, “no”.
Agent Draper was then asked by the Jury was, “you were asked if you saw a post about Eric ever saying that he was going to shoot law enforcement officers”? Agent Draper responded, “I don’t recall anything like that”.
Jess Marchese stood to ask a question when the Jury was out saying, “well, if you had seen something like that, that would have been relevant enough to put in your report and bring it here into the courtroom”. The Prosecution actually snickered and said, “you mean other than ‘by any means’”? This ended the testimony of Agent Sarah Draper.
Returning to the stand now was Agent Joel Willis who, just yesterday, was pumping his fist clenched arm to Draper signifying “yes”! And, fist bumping all in clear view of the Jury. Remember Agent Willis sits behind the Prosecutors every day in court. Agent Willis returns today to bring his “time line” into evidence. Agent Willis is not using the meta data or time-stamps for his evidence, he’s made his own. It includes illegible photos, boxes and arrows with names. Agent Willis submits 88 exhibits. A side bar is immediately called, it lasted 25 minutes. Judge Navarro ruling “it will be entered in it’s entirety”. Agent Willis continued by showing all the evidence that has already been submitted into the case and shown in court. It includes evidence on Ryan Payne, Ryan Bundy, Dave Bundy, Cliven Bundy to name just a few. Willis only got through 26 of the 88 exhibits today. Agent Willis begins by showing screen-shots from Todd Engel’s Facebook posts returns. Actually, another Agent testified to this evidence in the last trial, but they threw the rules out the window again having Willis testify to the evidence today.
Some commentary on Agent Willis’ tactic here is to use the guilt of Todd Engel against these four men. Some of Todd’s posts are, “the Sheriff has given an hour to disarm the BLM”. “Headed out to block the freeway and take the cows back”. The government is throwing all it’s cards on the table in order to convict these four men. Cliven, Ryan, Ammon and Pete Santilli were not armed. So, how can the government charge all of Tier #1 with three 924c charges, gun charges, that hold a mandatory minimum for 57 years if the government cannot get the gun convictions, because they are going to use the “guilt by association” tactic again in their trial. Throughout this court trial, the Prosecution is trying to drive home the point that belonging to an organized militia in multiple states is illegal! The government is proving a point with this second trial of Tier #3 saying “we are going to keep trying these men with your tax dollars, no matter how much is costs, until we get a conviction”. The government will no longer tell how much they are spending on these cases because the price tag has skyrocketed to many millions of tax dollars! The government is determined to get a conviction because they can’t have Americans from the Western States standing up to the Federal Government, if they let them, we are back to 1776. Everyone who belongs to an organized militia is encouraged to make a video about how you feel about the government telling you that militias are illegal. Post it online and tag Judge Navarro and President Trump in your post and educate people about what our founding says about the militia. The government is taking a flying leap here on their stance on militia since the National Guard is also a militia. When are our elected representatives going to do something about this? When is enough, enough?
Todd Leventhal gave a rebuttal to Ahmed saying, “it’s not the fact that you read the post mentioning McVeigh, it’s that you misrepresented it and elicited more testimony from Agent Sarah Draper asking that she define who McVeigh was and what he did”. When everyone should do their research and find out that McVeigh was the fall guy, and testimony from a prison confidant tells us he’s not really dead! Ahmed responded, “explaining the allowed exhibit is allowed in court”. There was a lot of back and fourth in arguing this point.
Jess Marchese stood to argue, “what Eric Parker said 18 months after the fact has nothing to to with 18 months before. Refer back to the Indictment. Idaho III%, Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine are not included”! Judge Gloria Navarro answered by saying, “the government has to pick and choose what the government decides to prosecute or not”. Trying to say that it’s not part of the Indictment, but we are going to prosecute it anyway. A “403 Balancing Test” was brought up at this point, which after research is described as, “Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice Confusion, Waste of Time or other”. Ahmed for the Prosecution stated, “this is not a 404 B”, which from my research is “Character Evidence, Crimes and Other Acts”.
Todd Leventhal got back up and said, “if the government wants to talk mind-set. Why is the Defense unable to talk about it”? At this point the reporter fails to report a ruling, so court moves forward with cross examination of Agent Sarah Draper.
Jess Marchese questioned Agent Draper about a video link in a Facebook post that said, “does anyone know anyone in the Nevada militia”? Which absolutely had no responses.
Todd Leventhal questioned Agent Draper about a Facebook posts from Scott Drexler mentioning, “one is from MSNBC, one is from Reuters etc.”, you are using what these news agencies said against Mr. Drexler. Saying to Agent Draper, “you personally got on to Scott Drexler’s page and took screen-shots of public posts. You testified that other agents would take these screen-shots and get them to you”? Agent Draper rebutted by saying, “employees NOT Agents”. She repeated this phrase correcting the Defense time after time. Which begs the question. Is an Informant an employee? Since he receives a government paycheck. Leventhal then asked Agent Draper, “where you aware of anyone arrested in Oregon”? The question received an Objection and Judge Navarro immediately called a side bar, just one of many today, and they were extremely long! The objection was sustained so Leventhal went to another question, “were you aware of Mr. Drexler pointing his gun at anyone? Are you aware of Mr. Drexler demanding anything from anyone in Oregon? Do you know how long Mr. Drexler was in Oregon? Have you ever had any dealings with the III% of Idaho”? This received an objection it was sustained. Leventhal continued, “after 2012 have you had any dealings with the III% of Idaho”? This drew another objection that resulted in a side bar. Returning from the side bar Leventhal asked, “did you in your law enforcement capacity have any dealings with the Idaho III%”? Which also received an objection. Leventhal finished with re-establishing the fact that she was the lead investigator in regards to Stewart, Drexler and Parker. Agent Draper told the court she had 5 -6 employees working with her. Agent Draper is asked how Eric Parker’s post appears on Scott Drexler’s page? Agent Draper falsely tells the court that every “tag” must be approved by the person in it, but this is only selected as an option in the Facebook Settings. Agent Draper produced photo evidence of a screen-shot of the post in question. Visible in the screen-shot is evidence the “employee” who took the screen-shot has four mutual friends with Scott Drexler. By the process of deduction two of those were Eric Parker and Steven Stewart, the other two, we’re not sure of. Leventhal asked Draper, “can your ‘employees’ communicate with these men online”? Agent draper insists that “they cannot”, she must not know anything about Facebook! Leventhal brought up an example trying to prove his point that these men could have been goaded into responding to something in a certain way, showing Agent Draper a post by an individual who posted, “be careful, bridges can be choke points”.
The Prosecution went forward with re-direct asking Agent Draper, “to your knowledge do you know of any of these government ‘employees’ working undercover and coerced any information from the Defendants”? Draper’s response, “not to my knowledge”.
Next up were the Jury questions, since Judge Navarro has invited them to ask questions. First up, “are you looking at any other sources other than Facebook”? No answer is reported by the courtroom observer. Next, “was your ‘team’ looking at Eric, Steve and Scott before April 12, 2014”? Agent Draper answered, “no, we weren’t”. Another question, “when did you start your investigation on these men”? Draper responded, “I can’t answer that”. The next Juror asked, “were the posts only visible to friends only or visible to anyone who looked at the page”? Again, the reporter fails to give an answer! Next, “Draper testified that post were pulled from ‘public viewable content’. Would becoming a friend with that person make the post publicly viewable content”? Agent Draper, at this time, changed her previous testimony saying, “becoming a friend of a person does not make their content ‘publicly viewable’, and that some of the evidence entered today was not publicly viewable. There was no Search Warrant and was harvested by a government paid ‘employee/informant’ that was friends with these men on Facebook”. Another question, “would the picture attached to the Facebook post be visible in the Facebook Warrant Return”? This had to do with the fact that only the text these men wrote was visible, the rest of the screen-shot was redacted to conceal the informants identity. The next question was, “in order for a friend to be on Facebook, does that action have to be approved by both parties”? The reporter failed to give Agent Draper’s response. Next question, “were you given training on looking at Facebook Returns or dealing with Facebook Returns”? Draper tells the Jury, “only by experience”. The next question had to deal with the Facebook Search Warrant, the date and time and period it was active for. Next the Jury asked Agent Draper, “do you have a way of determining who posted what post, such as a friend, wife or husband”? Agent Draper responded, “no, you could give out your login name and password and anyone could post for you”. The next question had to do with an exhibit of a post, the Jury asked if Eric Parker had made the comment on the bottom of the post. Agent Draper had to answer “no, it was a shared post”. A Jury member asked about “the scope” and was told it would be addressed in the legal instruction. What this question was dealing with was why are we hearing evidence of Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine if it was not included in the Indictment? The government had a meeting when the Jury left the courtroom for lunch and their claim is that Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine “are furtherance of the conspiracy”. Jess Marchese and Todd Leventhal argued that the Indictment included cattle, Cliven Bundy and extorting Federal Officers from executing a Court Order in Nevada. It has nothing to do with Sugar Pine Mine or White Hope Mine. Judge Gloria Navarro told the Defense Attorneys “it is included”. Leventhal asked Judge Navarro to show them in the testimony of the Grand Jury where it says anything about these Protests? Judge Navarro says it includes these and other groups and individuals like Schuyler Barbeau and Blaine Cooper because they were present at Sugar Pine Mine and White Hope Mine.
We return to more Jury questions, “at what point do you consider a post relevant enough to be viewed by you personally, rather than by one of your paid employees”. Agent Draper rambled on and on really saying nothing of relevance but ended up exposing the fact she knows nothing about Facebook. Another question, “did your ‘agents’ deliberately engage in conversation to get the Defendants to incriminate themselves”? Draper, “no”. The Jury asked a question about “UTC”, (Common Universal Time). There was no answer reported. At this time Todd Leventhal asked for a side bar. These side bars are done out of earshot of the Jury and Courtroom Observers, so we don’t know what was discussed or what the result was. Court continued with more Jury questions including questions about Meta Data and the investigation to which Agent Draper responded she didn’t really know. The next Juror asked about the guidelines for redacting a post. Judge Navarro decided to answer this one herself saying, “any redaction on the post the parties do not agree upon, I make that decision”, because we all know she’s working for the Prosecution!
Todd Leventhal then questioned Agent Sarah Draper about how accepting a friend request works saying, “if your agents are not coercing these men into conversation, are they not coercing them into having friendship on Facebook by making their account look like someone they would be friends with”? This really becomes curious because someone like Ricky Lovelien is hardly ever on Facebook and may be easily “coerced” into a friendship with someone he doesn’t really know. This drew objection that resulted in another side bar. Leventhal returned asking, “in order to be a friend you have to have a Facebook Account, and the agents made their own accounts, and if they set up their own accounts and you’re not with them all the time, how do you know they are not coercing them, they would be created to look enticing when seen by someone like Scott Drexler they would approve them”? Agent Draper responded, “yes, one of our employees did become a friend of Drexler. We know of one employee that was a friend of Drexler. There was an alias account created, but that was long before he became a friend with Drexler. It being an existing account”. Agent Draper was then asked if she was involved in making the account or how much she knew about the account”? Responding, “no”.
Agent Draper was then asked by the Jury was, “you were asked if you saw a post about Eric ever saying that he was going to shoot law enforcement officers”? Agent Draper responded, “I don’t recall anything like that”.
Jess Marchese stood to ask a question when the Jury was out saying, “well, if you had seen something like that, that would have been relevant enough to put in your report and bring it here into the courtroom”. The Prosecution actually snickered and said, “you mean other than ‘by any means’”? This ended the testimony of Agent Sarah Draper.
Returning to the stand now was Agent Joel Willis who, just yesterday, was pumping his fist clenched arm to Draper signifying “yes”! And, fist bumping all in clear view of the Jury. Remember Agent Willis sits behind the Prosecutors every day in court. Agent Willis returns today to bring his “time line” into evidence. Agent Willis is not using the meta data or time-stamps for his evidence, he’s made his own. It includes illegible photos, boxes and arrows with names. Agent Willis submits 88 exhibits. A side bar is immediately called, it lasted 25 minutes. Judge Navarro ruling “it will be entered in it’s entirety”. Agent Willis continued by showing all the evidence that has already been submitted into the case and shown in court. It includes evidence on Ryan Payne, Ryan Bundy, Dave Bundy, Cliven Bundy to name just a few. Willis only got through 26 of the 88 exhibits today. Agent Willis begins by showing screen-shots from Todd Engel’s Facebook posts returns. Actually, another Agent testified to this evidence in the last trial, but they threw the rules out the window again having Willis testify to the evidence today.
Some commentary on Agent Willis’ tactic here is to use the guilt of Todd Engel against these four men. Some of Todd’s posts are, “the Sheriff has given an hour to disarm the BLM”. “Headed out to block the freeway and take the cows back”. The government is throwing all it’s cards on the table in order to convict these four men. Cliven, Ryan, Ammon and Pete Santilli were not armed. So, how can the government charge all of Tier #1 with three 924c charges, gun charges, that hold a mandatory minimum for 57 years if the government cannot get the gun convictions, because they are going to use the “guilt by association” tactic again in their trial. Throughout this court trial, the Prosecution is trying to drive home the point that belonging to an organized militia in multiple states is illegal! The government is proving a point with this second trial of Tier #3 saying “we are going to keep trying these men with your tax dollars, no matter how much is costs, until we get a conviction”. The government will no longer tell how much they are spending on these cases because the price tag has skyrocketed to many millions of tax dollars! The government is determined to get a conviction because they can’t have Americans from the Western States standing up to the Federal Government, if they let them, we are back to 1776. Everyone who belongs to an organized militia is encouraged to make a video about how you feel about the government telling you that militias are illegal. Post it online and tag Judge Navarro and President Trump in your post and educate people about what our founding says about the militia. The government is taking a flying leap here on their stance on militia since the National Guard is also a militia. When are our elected representatives going to do something about this? When is enough, enough?
August 2, 2017
It was a case of “Tyranny On Steroids” today in The Queen’s Court of Judge Gloria Navarro. The session began with the Judge, Prosecution and the Defense discussing what Facebook evidence would be allowed in as evidence today. All of this discussion was done before the Jury was allowed in to the courtroom. This discussion session lasted 30 to 45 minutes.
The Prosecution began by entering a photo of a shirt with a flag on the upper arm on the sleeve. While the Prosecution through Special Agent Sarah Draper of the FBI is trying to get the Jury to believe that this, somehow makes the men “scary”, you need to know that every camo/military style shirt will have this flag affixed by default. There is absolutely nothing special about this shirt. Steven Stewarts Attorney, Richard Tanasi objected to Steven’s photo being used as evidence in this way. The government’s only goal here is to demonize the public to divert attention from it’s own “officers” who were decked out with flack-jackets and semi-automatic weapons. Judge Navarro overruled the objection and the evidence was allowed. The Prosecution went on to present evidence about “co-conspirator statements”, saying the outrageous statement, “they are responsible for EACH OTHERS illegal actions”! They showed a photo of Parker, Stewart and Lovelien at an outdoor shooting range and labeled it “training in the dessert”. The Prosecution told the Jury, “the date of their conspiracy goes through the date of their arrest. The conspiracy goes to protecting the land around the Bundy Ranch up until their arrest”. Agent Sarah Draper claimed that Eric, Steven and Scott going to the mines in Burns is a continuance of the conspiracy because they are recruiting bragging and continuing to ward off the Bureau Of Land Management”. The Defense is objecting to this evidence because the III% of Idaho and Sugar Pine Mine does not establish a conspiracy. The government itself, in it’s own indictment said these men were being charged with extortion of the cattle and prevent BLM Agents from executing their court orders, once again changing the rules of the game as they go along. The government is saying that their conspiracy continued "because they never opted out of the conspiracy", and that includes up to this very day, because they won’t opt out of the conspiracy by admitting guilt by plea bargain.
The Jury remains out of the courtroom still and the Prosecution brings up Sugar Pine Mine and Booking Photos of the men. We all know that the government wants to use the booking photos, because everyone always looks like they’ve been through the ringer and they are portrayed as criminals. The photo of Ricky Lovelien is being pushed by the Prosecution is because the booking agent couldn’t even identify Lovelien during his testimony before the court! The Prosecution wants to show booking photos of Eric Parker, Steven Stewart and Scott Drexler just to show their tattoos! As we told you several days ago, Parker and Drexler bared their arms in court to expose their tattoos on their own terms as the Prosecution was going to use them to demonize them. The other reason the government wants the booking photos allowed is because the photos of these men show them in orange jumpsuits, shackles and handcuffs. Parker’s photo is extremely demeaning since they bared him to the waist the show his extensively tattooed torso. We further know that this is in an effort to demonize these men before the Jury.
At this point the reporter begins to tell what happened with the Jury Questions for the Weapons Expert, who’s name I still do not know, but no questions were relayed. There was some discussion about Steven Stewarts gun not being able to shoot as far as the government is trying to project. Reminding the Jury that his sights were broken. You might just say Steven Stewart just brought his gun for affect, and to defend himself if need be.
The Prosecutions re-direct was mentioned at this point, asking the Weapons Expert “you couldn’t tell if the gun was loaded but could you tell if the gun was unloaded”? The Expert said that the bolt action was closed so that meant the pin was engaged. The Expert also testified that the post was in tact for the sight, but didn’t know when it had been broken, if it was before April 12, 2014 or not.
At this point Special Agent Sarah Draper was called back to the stand. The Prosecution continued to have her present Facebook posts as evidence. Only a few were from the day of April 12, 2014. The majority of the posts are after April 12th Stand Up at Bunkerville and have NOTHING to do with it! Blaine Cooper posted a meme that included Eric Parker on the Northbound bride. Parker saw it and shared it to his timeline. There was some comments associated with the post where Zack Sander asked, “what type of gun is that”? Eric answered “a Saiga 223”. The government is trying to use “scary weapons” and association with people like Blaine Cooper as a way to defame these people and convict them in the eyes of the Jury. At this point Judge Gloria Navarro interjects with her own question of “who is Blaine Cooper? Was he on the bride or the wash”? These four Defendants didn’t even know who Blaine Cooper was at the time of Bundy Ranch. They did not become familiar with him until many months after the Protest in Bunkerville. Once again, it is guilt by association. A multitude of evidence from Blaine Cooper was entered into the evidence file today. Blaine Cooper entered in to Plea Deals in association with the Oregon Protest and the Bunkerville Stand Off. He may be working for the government to infiltrate the Patriot Community. We must learn that the government will eat its own, and just because they indict someone and abuse them in prison does not mean these people are not tools of the government. A one minute portion of a video interview with White Hope Mine Owner George Kornec was played where Blaine Cooper is in frame with Eric Parker and Scott Drexler. We can look to Greg Burleson as an example of that, and Chip Tatum, if you know who he is. While arguing over another piece of evidence of a meme with “the Viking Prayer” and Scott Drexler on it. The Judge starts to answer and objection for the Prosecution in argument from the Defense. The Judge had to stop herself, because she had a split second of reality when she realized the Judge should not be pleading the Prosecutions case, and let the Prosecution continue to voice their opinion regarding the evidence.
The Prosecution brings up an operation in Oregon in 2015. FBI Special Agent Sarah Draper testified “the dispute was between the miners and the BLM. The dispute had to deal with ‘surface rights’. There was an administrative process going on. The miners had put in an appeal on something the BLM had sent them. The miners had sent for help from the Militia. They conducted armed patrols of the area”, known as Operation Gold Rush. At this point photos were shown of individuals wearing camo and pointing their middle fingers. Agent Draper told the Jury that the people who were at Bundy Ranch also went to Operation Gold Rush. A blanket statement like this should not be allowed in court. Agent Draper continued, “Eric Parker and Scott Drexler were conducting patrols, security operations”. This drew objection from the Defense as to how Draper knows this? Revealing the fact that Agent Draper doesn’t know this, she is making assumptions based on what she trolled for on Facebook. Every post presented as evidence is allowed in as testimony because the government is siting “un-indicted co-conspirator statements”. At this point the Prosecution enters evidence in connection with Shcuyler Barbeau who was at Bundy Ranch and one of the Mine Protests. Agent Draper testified that Eric Parker posted something about Barbeau mentioning that he was kidnapped by US Marshalls and Federal Agents. The post spoken of the other day was a lengthy post in which the Prosecution was able to redact all of the commentary from Eric Parker’s Facebook in which he tells his friends that he ducked down because the “government sniper agents had green-lighted”, and other language that would support Parker defending himself and others on scene. Other portions of the post were talk about how the patriots wanted to keep the Millers at arms length because of their volatile behavior. McVeigh was also mentioned. Agent Draper drew a parallel from McVeigh and Eric conspiring against the government saying, “and who is McVeigh”? This drew objection from the Defense but Judge Navarro overruled and Draper continued by answering her own question, “Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City Bomber, he bombed a Federal Building”. Next Agent Draper was asked about an MSNBC article in which she tells the court Scott Drexler posted to his wall saying, “nice picture Eric”. Then a post from the Idaho III% was shared. Then Agent Draper testified to a shared video Oathkeppers made and posted to the internet, another case of guilt by association. There was an abundance of Facebook “evidence” presented in court today. The Defense objected to this as “cumulative evidence”, overkill in other words. This objection was denied by Judge Navarro. The bulk of the cumulative evidence is photos, the same photos over, and over, and over again. The Prosecution won’t let the Defense enter hardly any of their media showing the militarization of the BLM/NPS etc. and they won’t let them use hardly any of the Body-Cam and Dash-Cam footage. When it is allowed it is only one minute here, one minute there, no audio of the Defense, but audio for the Prosecution. It’s really lopsided.
The Prosecution continued with presenting the evidence Agent Sarah Draper harvested off Facebook, including a video Steven Stewart made when the BLM was leaving the area after told by Tom Roberts of the Sheriffs Department to back down. This video depicted the Protestors lining the hillside with their flags, weapons and middle fingers, telling the BLM “bye, bye”. Tom Jenkins of Las Vegas Metro told the court last trial that “the streets were lined with white men pointing guns at the BLM convoy”, but this video proves that this black officer was lying on the stand. Steven Stewart could be heard on the video saying, “they threatened up with gas. We were gonna be martyrs if we had too”! Stewart did not say we are here to shoot Federal Agents.
The Prosecution began by entering a photo of a shirt with a flag on the upper arm on the sleeve. While the Prosecution through Special Agent Sarah Draper of the FBI is trying to get the Jury to believe that this, somehow makes the men “scary”, you need to know that every camo/military style shirt will have this flag affixed by default. There is absolutely nothing special about this shirt. Steven Stewarts Attorney, Richard Tanasi objected to Steven’s photo being used as evidence in this way. The government’s only goal here is to demonize the public to divert attention from it’s own “officers” who were decked out with flack-jackets and semi-automatic weapons. Judge Navarro overruled the objection and the evidence was allowed. The Prosecution went on to present evidence about “co-conspirator statements”, saying the outrageous statement, “they are responsible for EACH OTHERS illegal actions”! They showed a photo of Parker, Stewart and Lovelien at an outdoor shooting range and labeled it “training in the dessert”. The Prosecution told the Jury, “the date of their conspiracy goes through the date of their arrest. The conspiracy goes to protecting the land around the Bundy Ranch up until their arrest”. Agent Sarah Draper claimed that Eric, Steven and Scott going to the mines in Burns is a continuance of the conspiracy because they are recruiting bragging and continuing to ward off the Bureau Of Land Management”. The Defense is objecting to this evidence because the III% of Idaho and Sugar Pine Mine does not establish a conspiracy. The government itself, in it’s own indictment said these men were being charged with extortion of the cattle and prevent BLM Agents from executing their court orders, once again changing the rules of the game as they go along. The government is saying that their conspiracy continued "because they never opted out of the conspiracy", and that includes up to this very day, because they won’t opt out of the conspiracy by admitting guilt by plea bargain.
The Jury remains out of the courtroom still and the Prosecution brings up Sugar Pine Mine and Booking Photos of the men. We all know that the government wants to use the booking photos, because everyone always looks like they’ve been through the ringer and they are portrayed as criminals. The photo of Ricky Lovelien is being pushed by the Prosecution is because the booking agent couldn’t even identify Lovelien during his testimony before the court! The Prosecution wants to show booking photos of Eric Parker, Steven Stewart and Scott Drexler just to show their tattoos! As we told you several days ago, Parker and Drexler bared their arms in court to expose their tattoos on their own terms as the Prosecution was going to use them to demonize them. The other reason the government wants the booking photos allowed is because the photos of these men show them in orange jumpsuits, shackles and handcuffs. Parker’s photo is extremely demeaning since they bared him to the waist the show his extensively tattooed torso. We further know that this is in an effort to demonize these men before the Jury.
At this point the reporter begins to tell what happened with the Jury Questions for the Weapons Expert, who’s name I still do not know, but no questions were relayed. There was some discussion about Steven Stewarts gun not being able to shoot as far as the government is trying to project. Reminding the Jury that his sights were broken. You might just say Steven Stewart just brought his gun for affect, and to defend himself if need be.
The Prosecutions re-direct was mentioned at this point, asking the Weapons Expert “you couldn’t tell if the gun was loaded but could you tell if the gun was unloaded”? The Expert said that the bolt action was closed so that meant the pin was engaged. The Expert also testified that the post was in tact for the sight, but didn’t know when it had been broken, if it was before April 12, 2014 or not.
At this point Special Agent Sarah Draper was called back to the stand. The Prosecution continued to have her present Facebook posts as evidence. Only a few were from the day of April 12, 2014. The majority of the posts are after April 12th Stand Up at Bunkerville and have NOTHING to do with it! Blaine Cooper posted a meme that included Eric Parker on the Northbound bride. Parker saw it and shared it to his timeline. There was some comments associated with the post where Zack Sander asked, “what type of gun is that”? Eric answered “a Saiga 223”. The government is trying to use “scary weapons” and association with people like Blaine Cooper as a way to defame these people and convict them in the eyes of the Jury. At this point Judge Gloria Navarro interjects with her own question of “who is Blaine Cooper? Was he on the bride or the wash”? These four Defendants didn’t even know who Blaine Cooper was at the time of Bundy Ranch. They did not become familiar with him until many months after the Protest in Bunkerville. Once again, it is guilt by association. A multitude of evidence from Blaine Cooper was entered into the evidence file today. Blaine Cooper entered in to Plea Deals in association with the Oregon Protest and the Bunkerville Stand Off. He may be working for the government to infiltrate the Patriot Community. We must learn that the government will eat its own, and just because they indict someone and abuse them in prison does not mean these people are not tools of the government. A one minute portion of a video interview with White Hope Mine Owner George Kornec was played where Blaine Cooper is in frame with Eric Parker and Scott Drexler. We can look to Greg Burleson as an example of that, and Chip Tatum, if you know who he is. While arguing over another piece of evidence of a meme with “the Viking Prayer” and Scott Drexler on it. The Judge starts to answer and objection for the Prosecution in argument from the Defense. The Judge had to stop herself, because she had a split second of reality when she realized the Judge should not be pleading the Prosecutions case, and let the Prosecution continue to voice their opinion regarding the evidence.
The Prosecution brings up an operation in Oregon in 2015. FBI Special Agent Sarah Draper testified “the dispute was between the miners and the BLM. The dispute had to deal with ‘surface rights’. There was an administrative process going on. The miners had put in an appeal on something the BLM had sent them. The miners had sent for help from the Militia. They conducted armed patrols of the area”, known as Operation Gold Rush. At this point photos were shown of individuals wearing camo and pointing their middle fingers. Agent Draper told the Jury that the people who were at Bundy Ranch also went to Operation Gold Rush. A blanket statement like this should not be allowed in court. Agent Draper continued, “Eric Parker and Scott Drexler were conducting patrols, security operations”. This drew objection from the Defense as to how Draper knows this? Revealing the fact that Agent Draper doesn’t know this, she is making assumptions based on what she trolled for on Facebook. Every post presented as evidence is allowed in as testimony because the government is siting “un-indicted co-conspirator statements”. At this point the Prosecution enters evidence in connection with Shcuyler Barbeau who was at Bundy Ranch and one of the Mine Protests. Agent Draper testified that Eric Parker posted something about Barbeau mentioning that he was kidnapped by US Marshalls and Federal Agents. The post spoken of the other day was a lengthy post in which the Prosecution was able to redact all of the commentary from Eric Parker’s Facebook in which he tells his friends that he ducked down because the “government sniper agents had green-lighted”, and other language that would support Parker defending himself and others on scene. Other portions of the post were talk about how the patriots wanted to keep the Millers at arms length because of their volatile behavior. McVeigh was also mentioned. Agent Draper drew a parallel from McVeigh and Eric conspiring against the government saying, “and who is McVeigh”? This drew objection from the Defense but Judge Navarro overruled and Draper continued by answering her own question, “Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City Bomber, he bombed a Federal Building”. Next Agent Draper was asked about an MSNBC article in which she tells the court Scott Drexler posted to his wall saying, “nice picture Eric”. Then a post from the Idaho III% was shared. Then Agent Draper testified to a shared video Oathkeppers made and posted to the internet, another case of guilt by association. There was an abundance of Facebook “evidence” presented in court today. The Defense objected to this as “cumulative evidence”, overkill in other words. This objection was denied by Judge Navarro. The bulk of the cumulative evidence is photos, the same photos over, and over, and over again. The Prosecution won’t let the Defense enter hardly any of their media showing the militarization of the BLM/NPS etc. and they won’t let them use hardly any of the Body-Cam and Dash-Cam footage. When it is allowed it is only one minute here, one minute there, no audio of the Defense, but audio for the Prosecution. It’s really lopsided.
The Prosecution continued with presenting the evidence Agent Sarah Draper harvested off Facebook, including a video Steven Stewart made when the BLM was leaving the area after told by Tom Roberts of the Sheriffs Department to back down. This video depicted the Protestors lining the hillside with their flags, weapons and middle fingers, telling the BLM “bye, bye”. Tom Jenkins of Las Vegas Metro told the court last trial that “the streets were lined with white men pointing guns at the BLM convoy”, but this video proves that this black officer was lying on the stand. Steven Stewart could be heard on the video saying, “they threatened up with gas. We were gonna be martyrs if we had too”! Stewart did not say we are here to shoot Federal Agents.
The Defense then had a chance to cross examine the witness, and Richard Tanasi was first to cross examine Agent Sarah Draper, saying, “the BLM was driving away, you heard Steven Stewart say they were going to deploy chemicals on us if we didn’t back down, but we pushed forward and that they were prepared to be martyrs if they wanted us too. You are trained to identify threats or identify violence. Was what Steven Stewart doing a threat”? This was objected to sighting “legal conclusion”. A side bar ensued Judge Navarro refused to let this question be answered although just last week she let the Prosecution get away with having the witness answer a question drawing legal conclusion when objected to by the Defense. Judge Navarro stated, “this is an officer of the law, and he can comment on the law”. Tanasi finished by asking Agent Draper about a post by Steven Stewart saying that “someone showed him a scope”. Tanasi pointed out that the post had broken language and was hard to understand because he had not had any rest since arriving in Bunkerville, but in his jumbled up language what he was trying to say was someone had handed him their binoculars so he could see that there were snipers on the hill, and they were in the crosshairs. Tanasi exposed that Special Agent Sarah Draper met with the US Attorney’s Office 9 - 10 times.
It is important to note that during the side bar reported about earlier, that Federal Agents that are sitting with the Prosecution behind the bar were pumping their fists in the sign of “YES”! to Agent Sarah Draper as the Attorney’s had their discussion with Judge Navarro. This exhibition went on in full sight of the Jury and the courtroom observers and the US Marshalls who have been given the assignment of policing the courtroom observers to make sure they don’t move a muscle, chew gum, eat a tic tac or smile, for which they will be removed from the courtroom. But, the court assistant can chew gum and pop bubbles and she wants and the Jury can snack on candy to their hearts content, but heaven forbid the courtroom observers and the Defendants even look at each other. The Federal Agents might as well be doing “fist bumps”, “belly bumps" and “high fives” in the courtroom. It was just as disgusting.
Special Agent Sarah Draper and the Jury were allowed to leave the courtroom while Todd Leventhal stood to address Judge Navarro saying “the Prosecution elicited testimony about Timothy McVeigh. What has gone on here is SO outlandish! The Jury has already been tainted by this information. We declare a mistrial or at the very least a “limitation instruction”. The Prosecution denied it had been using the McVeigh information to defame the Defendants and Judge Navarro suddenly go really uncomfortable and wanted to bolt from the courtroom. So, Navarro said, “well, I deny your motion. I deny your motion for limitation of instruction until after the Prosecution has made their case”. Once again using her stall tactic hoping the Defense will for get her reason for postponing the action she needs to take. Navarro continued, “you can bring it up again, but I really need 24 hours to look it up. You need to go home and bring in case law to support your action”. This we are becoming familiar with. The government is just buying time to come up with a way to cover their butts! They have tried to anticipate every possible move the Defense may use, but they miss a few, but that doesn’t stop them from taking time behind the scenes to thwart the Defenses efforts, even if they have to black out a day to do it. The Judge refused to argue any of these motions in the courtroom. Maybe she’s not as smart as everyone gives her credit for. The way she treated Todd Engel’s motion that was supposed to take place on July 27, 2017 proves this point, as she made decrees from her chambers not allowing Todd to have his day in court, not even giving him and his family prior notice, as this was a very important hearing for them.
 |
| Shining The Light On The Secret Life Of Timothy McVeigh - Click To View Video |
Washington Watchdogs and the Media need to get off their duffs and come to Nevada and witness for themselves the injustice taking place in Judge Gloria Navarro’s court! No excuses! Although Judge Navarro has decreed a media blackout, the media should be screaming from the housetops that they want in, and that everyone needs to hear what’s going on in this trial! What is going on is criminal and the elected officials need to be prodded to do something about it! We want Gloria Navarro prosecuted for her actions from the bench. Where are you Jeff Sessions “friend of the Prosecution”! Where are you Ryan Zinke? They are both just part of the establishment in Washington who want to imprison America’s People and Steel the land and resources of The West! This tyranny must come to an end.
We also want out Freedom of the Press restored! The mainstream media propaganda machine is at war with the truth telling patriot community. The problem is big money is behind big media and we have the CIA, Google and YouTube engaged in the most intense coverup of Real News in US History! Those “powers that be” don’t want us learning the truth, about anything! This truth telling is one of the things that was the demise of many of our Founders as they were exposing corruption, that’s how we were founded, for heavens sake!
We also condemn the actions of the US Marshalls Office as they are abusing Andrea Parker while trying to take care of her husbands needs while on trial. The incident today was full on harassment of Andrea that took her away from the trial while she tried to get her husbands clothing. The US Marshalls refused to give the clothing to her that she picks up every Wednesday. Andrea confessed that she had been late several times and she wanted to correct that so, she showed up early this morning. The US Marshall told her “he could not tell what is what, so I can’t help you”. Andrea told them she would give them until lunch break to figure it out. So, Andrea came back to get the clothing from the Marshalls before they close for the day. Andrea was met with the US Marshalls saying to her, “well, didn’t you talk to them”? Meaning the Defendants. Andrea reminded the US Marshalls that she has been told if she talks to them. If she even says a word, looks or mouth something to those Defendants. I will be kicked out of court for the duration of the trial! She reminded the US Marshalls that their job is to talk to the Defendants at lunch and ask them about their clothing. “You said YOU were going to do that”!
August 1, 2017
Court began today with Jury Questions for Special Agent Joel Willis the Case Agent for the entire Bundy Ranch Protest. Agent Willis has attended every day in court in both trials and sits on the bench right behind the Prosecution table to coach as they question witnesses or present evidence. When called to testify by the Prosecution he merely stood up from the bench and walked up to the stand. Most unusual for ANY case! First Jury Question, “did the gap in the flyover have an effect on your timeline”? Agent Willis told the Jury, “no. It only effected when the Bureau Of Land Management was leaving because that is when the Cessna left for re-fueling”. Next question, “were you concerned for you safety at the site”? The Jury did not understand that this Agent was not on scene at the Protest he only spent thousands of hours combing the internet and Social Media in particular for photos, video, memes and anyone who gave the “thumbs up” to anything related to Liberty and Tyranny in an effort to construct a narrative wherein the government could seek a conviction in order to stop the uprising of the people of American West. Agent Willis did tell the Jury “he was not there”. Willis was then asked by the Jury, “did you visit the location at a later date, and did you look through the gap”? Agent Willis testified that he did. Agent Willis was then asked “did you take pictures”? Willis answered “yes. But we never got to see any of those pictures”. But, he didn’t need to because his job was to troll the internet looking for photos from other sources. The Jury then asked Willis about a website he harvested photos from asking, “was this website pro Bundy or against Bundy”? Agent Willis said, “they went to go show the protest, and they just happened to be out there during the stand-off”, basically a non answer. Courtroom observes report that there was a question the Judge wouldn’t allow be read, so they went to the next question. This is troubling, because it looks like the Judge is going to start censoring the Jury questions now. Next, there was a lengthy question about meta data and how it was researched on each of the sources Willis had harvested from the internet and Facebook in particular. Agent Willis told the Jury, “each of the pictures you see in my timeline has multiple references, and that is how I’m time stamping it”. So, in other words, he’s making it up as he goest along! No facts required here.
The Prosecution did some damage control asking Agent Willis if the plane was overhead from the time the people were going up to the gate and then moved away. The answer was not given by the reporter.
Todd Leventhal did some re-cross examination asking, “did the fact that the plane went to re-fuel effect your analysis”? Agent Willis responded, “yes”. Leventhal then said, “so your saying that the areal camera was there when the horses was in the wash, but it was not on the wash the entire time? So, in all these different photos your saying that you can tell by where this truck was, on the bridge, at this time. I can tell based on where these people were in the wash at this time, but when you watch the areal footage it does not cover all the venues at the same time”.
The Prosecution then calls Special Agent Sarah Draper for the FBI in Idaho. Agent Draper’s job was trolling Facebook to look for media and posts she could use to garner a conviction on Eric Parker, Steven Steward and Scott Drexler. Agent Draper served the Warrant on Eric Parker, his property and was present when Parker was arrested. Agent Draper begins by showing Facebook post in connection with Eric Parker. The fist post Draper testified to was a post from the Elko County Lightfoot Militia which he shares adding a comment, “got a neighbor down in Nevada. What are you gonna do when the shooting starts”, trying to draw inference from Parker sharing the article to him entering into a conspiracy. This article apparently had a video of Ryan Payne embedded in the article. Agent Draper is not able to prove Parker even saw the video, because the government cannot decipher this evidence. Agent Draper is trying to tell the Jury that because of Ryan Payne’s video Eric Parker came to Bunkerville, but she actually CAN’T prove it. Agent Draper, by way of the Prosecution entered into evidence another post that said, “does anyone know of anybody in the Nevada Militia”? This question posted to Facebook had absolutely no responses to it, but Agent Draper intends to convict Parker using it. During Agent Draper’s testimony there was a lot of objecting to a piece of evidence the Prosecution wanted to display. Both sides fought vehemently about this long post that was finally redacted to just display a portion, of which Parker posted, “the snipers are green-lighting”. This signal from the government bullies was Parker’s signal to get down below the cement barrier. The portion redacted included Parker’s statement that it will result in him ducking below the jersey barrier, which would give the Jury great insight into what really went on that day. Another portion of this lengthy post was the verbiage, “they threatened to kill everyone if the crowd did not disperse”. Which the Jury should also hear! It gives greater insight into the event that day. The Miller’s were also mentioned in the post, but it was also redacted, but Timothy McVeigh’s name was left for the Jury to see. The Miller’s were a couple that attended the Protest at Bunkerville but when caught using Provocateur tactics were asked to leave. It was reported by the main stream media that they went to a Nevada eatery and shot two police officers and a bystander, ran to a local Walmart and had a shootout where Jared was shot and Amanda turned the gun on herself, or was it the other way around? It was reported both ways. I recommend you look in to this false flag event.
The cat fight resumes with the Prosecution and the Defense argument about a III% of Idaho video and another skirmish over a comment with a thumbs up. The Defense objects stating hearsay. Judge Gloria Navarro goes for her “801 boo” to try to find a reason to overrule this objection. She is desperately searching. Frantic to find anything! Throwing the Prosecution a bone asking if they know where it may be or direct her to any case law that she may site in her ruling. Navarro finally throws out, “well, it goes to 801-D2-B”, which is a co-conspirator statement. At this point Agent Sarah Draper gave a supporting statement and the evidence is allowed. Basically, the Prosecution, and Agent Draper in particular is saying, if you give a comment a thumbs up/Like you are adopting that statement as your own. It’s as if you had said it. Agent Draper continued by identifying Steven Stewart and Eric Parker’s weapons, has them entered into evidence. At the conclusion of Agent Sarah Drapers testimony, she asked to be dismissed and have a weapons expert take the stand stating, "he needs to go home today”.
The Weapons Expert (no name was given) took the stand and told the court normally his job is to identify bullets, and match the bullet with the gun, but in his court testimony today his only identifies guns in photos, and match the guns to the photos presented as evidence and if they don’t have them, identify what weapon it is that they used. Apparently the “expert” did basically what the FBI did in the first trial in Oregon where they parade the weapons around the courtroom trying to scare the Jury, clanging them around and showing off how they know how to manipulate all the features on the guns. The expert tells the Jury what type of weapons they were and what type of ammunition they shoot. The expert admitted that he had not checked the weapons for range. This is negligence on his part, because it would be important to know if Parker and Stewart’s weapons would even have been effective in defending the Protestors from the trigger happy government operatives.
After the Weapons Expert testified for the Prosecution he was then open for cross examination. Richard Tanasi tells the “expert” that Steven Stewart’s gun is not a shotgun, which the expert had testified to. Tanasi also pointed out that the front sight on Stewart’s gun is broken, which the “expert” conveniently left out of his little weapons demonstration. Through Tanasi’s questioning, the Weapons “Expert” admits that Stewart’s gun in not pointing in any one direction. Tanasi concluded by telling the Jury that “this gentlemen has testified in court 43 times and every time the Prosecution has called on him, which shows he is bias.
Jess Marchese was next to question the Weapons Expert asking him about the water test date. The “expert” said, January 18, 2017, wanting to continue but was shut down by Marchese. Marchese next asked if any of the photos depicted Parker with his finger on the trigger and if he could tell if it was loaded or not? In previous testimony, he testified the safety was off.
Todd Leventha questioned the Weapons Expert next saying, “it appears to be a riffle, but it could be an air-soft gun that shoots plastic. “Would wind effect the light or range of the bullet? And, would being in between the cement barrier also effect the rand and trajectory of the bullet”? The Expert answered “yes”. It was also brought out during questioning that Steven Stewart had a magazine but it was holding 9mm ammunition.
Before Myhre stood up for re-direct, and FBI Agent that is sitting behind the Prosecutors stood and approached Myhre to converse with him, telling Myhre to ask the Weapons Expert about the water test date again and let him elaborate on the subject. So, Myhre obliged. During re-direct the Expert also did a ballistics test to see if the weapons were used in any unsolved murders. "It did not” said the Expert. The Expert was then asked "if he could tell a shotgun by appearance only”? He said, “yes”. The Expert was then asked “if he thought someone might think it was a shotgun”? The expert exited his seat to show how someone might think it’s a shotgun, trying to cover his butt because he doesn’t know his firearms and any “Expert” should, as he told the court earlier it WAS a shotgun when testifying to Stewarts weapon, because no one has seen a shotgun with an 18 inch barrel! People attending the trial have also been to the site at the wash and taken some measurments and can verify that the distance from the Northbound bridge to where the BLM/NPS etc were and measured 200 yards. Someone reported "it was like bringing a knife to a gunfight”. The fact being, 9mm would not travel the distance accurately.
Richard Tanasi approached the witness again saying, “you could tell it’s not a shotgun because of your law enforcement training”? The Weapons Expert replied, “yes”.
At this point Judge Gloria Navarro asked the witness her own question, “is an air-soft gun a firearm”? The reporter failed to give an answer.
It was now time for the Jury to ask a multitude of questions to the Weapons Expert. It was time for court to adjourn, so the Weapons “Expert” will have to return to court tomorrow, which was what Agent Draper was trying to prevent. Just like Agent Willis, they plan to return to the stand and give further testimony without being cross examined or have questions from the Jury. Nothing about this trial is conventional! The government is just making this up as they go along. Agent Sarah Draper is also expected to return to the stand tomorrow.
Courtroom observers are reporting that 1/3 of the proceedings were spent in side bar arguing points outside the Jury’s earshot. They also report that court is starting so late each day because the Prosecution is arguing points before the proceedings begin and the Jury is present to avoid them hearing the arguments about evidence, trying to control the narrative and exclude evidence when deliberation begins. These Jurors are demonstrating they WANT the evidence and they know it’s being kept from them!
The Prosecution did some damage control asking Agent Willis if the plane was overhead from the time the people were going up to the gate and then moved away. The answer was not given by the reporter.
Todd Leventhal did some re-cross examination asking, “did the fact that the plane went to re-fuel effect your analysis”? Agent Willis responded, “yes”. Leventhal then said, “so your saying that the areal camera was there when the horses was in the wash, but it was not on the wash the entire time? So, in all these different photos your saying that you can tell by where this truck was, on the bridge, at this time. I can tell based on where these people were in the wash at this time, but when you watch the areal footage it does not cover all the venues at the same time”.
The Prosecution then calls Special Agent Sarah Draper for the FBI in Idaho. Agent Draper’s job was trolling Facebook to look for media and posts she could use to garner a conviction on Eric Parker, Steven Steward and Scott Drexler. Agent Draper served the Warrant on Eric Parker, his property and was present when Parker was arrested. Agent Draper begins by showing Facebook post in connection with Eric Parker. The fist post Draper testified to was a post from the Elko County Lightfoot Militia which he shares adding a comment, “got a neighbor down in Nevada. What are you gonna do when the shooting starts”, trying to draw inference from Parker sharing the article to him entering into a conspiracy. This article apparently had a video of Ryan Payne embedded in the article. Agent Draper is not able to prove Parker even saw the video, because the government cannot decipher this evidence. Agent Draper is trying to tell the Jury that because of Ryan Payne’s video Eric Parker came to Bunkerville, but she actually CAN’T prove it. Agent Draper, by way of the Prosecution entered into evidence another post that said, “does anyone know of anybody in the Nevada Militia”? This question posted to Facebook had absolutely no responses to it, but Agent Draper intends to convict Parker using it. During Agent Draper’s testimony there was a lot of objecting to a piece of evidence the Prosecution wanted to display. Both sides fought vehemently about this long post that was finally redacted to just display a portion, of which Parker posted, “the snipers are green-lighting”. This signal from the government bullies was Parker’s signal to get down below the cement barrier. The portion redacted included Parker’s statement that it will result in him ducking below the jersey barrier, which would give the Jury great insight into what really went on that day. Another portion of this lengthy post was the verbiage, “they threatened to kill everyone if the crowd did not disperse”. Which the Jury should also hear! It gives greater insight into the event that day. The Miller’s were also mentioned in the post, but it was also redacted, but Timothy McVeigh’s name was left for the Jury to see. The Miller’s were a couple that attended the Protest at Bunkerville but when caught using Provocateur tactics were asked to leave. It was reported by the main stream media that they went to a Nevada eatery and shot two police officers and a bystander, ran to a local Walmart and had a shootout where Jared was shot and Amanda turned the gun on herself, or was it the other way around? It was reported both ways. I recommend you look in to this false flag event.
The cat fight resumes with the Prosecution and the Defense argument about a III% of Idaho video and another skirmish over a comment with a thumbs up. The Defense objects stating hearsay. Judge Gloria Navarro goes for her “801 boo” to try to find a reason to overrule this objection. She is desperately searching. Frantic to find anything! Throwing the Prosecution a bone asking if they know where it may be or direct her to any case law that she may site in her ruling. Navarro finally throws out, “well, it goes to 801-D2-B”, which is a co-conspirator statement. At this point Agent Sarah Draper gave a supporting statement and the evidence is allowed. Basically, the Prosecution, and Agent Draper in particular is saying, if you give a comment a thumbs up/Like you are adopting that statement as your own. It’s as if you had said it. Agent Draper continued by identifying Steven Stewart and Eric Parker’s weapons, has them entered into evidence. At the conclusion of Agent Sarah Drapers testimony, she asked to be dismissed and have a weapons expert take the stand stating, "he needs to go home today”.
The Weapons Expert (no name was given) took the stand and told the court normally his job is to identify bullets, and match the bullet with the gun, but in his court testimony today his only identifies guns in photos, and match the guns to the photos presented as evidence and if they don’t have them, identify what weapon it is that they used. Apparently the “expert” did basically what the FBI did in the first trial in Oregon where they parade the weapons around the courtroom trying to scare the Jury, clanging them around and showing off how they know how to manipulate all the features on the guns. The expert tells the Jury what type of weapons they were and what type of ammunition they shoot. The expert admitted that he had not checked the weapons for range. This is negligence on his part, because it would be important to know if Parker and Stewart’s weapons would even have been effective in defending the Protestors from the trigger happy government operatives.
After the Weapons Expert testified for the Prosecution he was then open for cross examination. Richard Tanasi tells the “expert” that Steven Stewart’s gun is not a shotgun, which the expert had testified to. Tanasi also pointed out that the front sight on Stewart’s gun is broken, which the “expert” conveniently left out of his little weapons demonstration. Through Tanasi’s questioning, the Weapons “Expert” admits that Stewart’s gun in not pointing in any one direction. Tanasi concluded by telling the Jury that “this gentlemen has testified in court 43 times and every time the Prosecution has called on him, which shows he is bias.
Jess Marchese was next to question the Weapons Expert asking him about the water test date. The “expert” said, January 18, 2017, wanting to continue but was shut down by Marchese. Marchese next asked if any of the photos depicted Parker with his finger on the trigger and if he could tell if it was loaded or not? In previous testimony, he testified the safety was off.
Todd Leventha questioned the Weapons Expert next saying, “it appears to be a riffle, but it could be an air-soft gun that shoots plastic. “Would wind effect the light or range of the bullet? And, would being in between the cement barrier also effect the rand and trajectory of the bullet”? The Expert answered “yes”. It was also brought out during questioning that Steven Stewart had a magazine but it was holding 9mm ammunition.
Before Myhre stood up for re-direct, and FBI Agent that is sitting behind the Prosecutors stood and approached Myhre to converse with him, telling Myhre to ask the Weapons Expert about the water test date again and let him elaborate on the subject. So, Myhre obliged. During re-direct the Expert also did a ballistics test to see if the weapons were used in any unsolved murders. "It did not” said the Expert. The Expert was then asked "if he could tell a shotgun by appearance only”? He said, “yes”. The Expert was then asked “if he thought someone might think it was a shotgun”? The expert exited his seat to show how someone might think it’s a shotgun, trying to cover his butt because he doesn’t know his firearms and any “Expert” should, as he told the court earlier it WAS a shotgun when testifying to Stewarts weapon, because no one has seen a shotgun with an 18 inch barrel! People attending the trial have also been to the site at the wash and taken some measurments and can verify that the distance from the Northbound bridge to where the BLM/NPS etc were and measured 200 yards. Someone reported "it was like bringing a knife to a gunfight”. The fact being, 9mm would not travel the distance accurately.
Richard Tanasi approached the witness again saying, “you could tell it’s not a shotgun because of your law enforcement training”? The Weapons Expert replied, “yes”.
At this point Judge Gloria Navarro asked the witness her own question, “is an air-soft gun a firearm”? The reporter failed to give an answer.
It was now time for the Jury to ask a multitude of questions to the Weapons Expert. It was time for court to adjourn, so the Weapons “Expert” will have to return to court tomorrow, which was what Agent Draper was trying to prevent. Just like Agent Willis, they plan to return to the stand and give further testimony without being cross examined or have questions from the Jury. Nothing about this trial is conventional! The government is just making this up as they go along. Agent Sarah Draper is also expected to return to the stand tomorrow.
Courtroom observers are reporting that 1/3 of the proceedings were spent in side bar arguing points outside the Jury’s earshot. They also report that court is starting so late each day because the Prosecution is arguing points before the proceedings begin and the Jury is present to avoid them hearing the arguments about evidence, trying to control the narrative and exclude evidence when deliberation begins. These Jurors are demonstrating they WANT the evidence and they know it’s being kept from them!
July 31, 2017
Judge Gloria Navarro shocked the court today as she banned Eric Parker from being present for his own trial! There were several side bars called today, and these are usually quite lengthy, lasting around 30 minutes each. During these side bars the Jury is allowed to pass a bowl of candy and eat to their hearts content, the gallery is allowed to visit quietly, unless the Judge catches you raising your finger as you count to yourself the Jury members. But, the Defendants are no to move or make a sound. No talking to anyone at the Defense table or adjusting yourself in your chair! This is what got Eric kicked out of the courtroom for the morning session, and possibly the afternoon session, depending on who Judge Navarro feels at the time. Courtroom observers say that during one of the side bars Eric parker only turned towards Scott Drexler. That was it! Judge Navarro saw this out of the corner of her eye and immediately reprimanded Parker saying, “you have disobeyed my orders. She threw him in a holding cell barring him from being present during his own trial. Judge Navarro has told the Defendants that her rules are no looking at the Jury. No mouthing anything to anyone. No looking around the courtroom. They are to sit like mannequins and treated by the Judge like vicious animals ready to bring terror upon anyone within their midst. And, this is what Judge Navarro wants. She wants the Jury to think they are just waiting for an opportunity to strike! Judge Navarro said to the court, “this time it isn’t so serious, but next time it could be. This cannot continue in this trial, although this is only the first instance sighted. Judge Navarro even said "she doesn’t know if Parker did say anything to Drexler or Parker may have been looking at a book on his lap", but it’s “conviction by thought crime” again, as it’s the fear of what Navarro thinks might happen. This woman could not follow her own rules she has set for the Defendants. She can’t stay in her seat and keep her mouth shut and just listen! She continuously makes herself part of this case by interrupting witness testimony to rephrase questions and ask her own instead of listening and moderating. I wish she would just try it once. After Judge Navarro was finished berating him before the court, Parker said, “your honor”. She interrupted him by saying, “you have an Attorney who will speak for you, and I would suggest you use that”, not allowing him to address her at all. This was very baffling to Parker since in previous hearings he has been able to speak for himself, but she doesn’t like Parker because he is good at communicating his point, so she’s banning him from speaking a single word. Since the hearing, Judge Navarro won’t even look at him, accept during a side bar leaping from the bench to scold him. Everyone in the courtroom has been peaceful. This is just another way Judge Navarro is showing her bias against the Defense. Proving that the government is the one using “childhood schoolyard bullying tactics” as she claimed a few days ago the Protestors were doing. As they demonstrated when 12 BLM Agents took Dave Bundy’s IPad away, knocked him to the ground and forced his face into the gravel, interrogated him for hours then drove his to Las Vegas and booted him out on the street with a sack lunch! Not to mention forcing Ryan Bundy and his family in to their van at gun point and forcing them to drive off while they were abusing Dave! Those are childhood schoolyard bullying tactics!
The Prosecution called Special Agent Robert Shilakis from the Bureau Of Land Management to the stand. There is, apparently some video that Agent Shilakis took at the events at Bundy Ranch. During Agent Shilakis’ testimony he showed his video and talked a lot about what people were wearing, using this the profile the Protestors. The fact is, if they had a weapon, they were a threat to him, although there were no shots fired, no injuries on the day of April 12, 2017 accept for the BLM’s ego. Agent Shilakis showed an example of a man standing up with his weapon slung over this shoulder. The man takes a hold of the sling and swung in back. This was said to be by the Agent as pointing his weapon, although the man was just adjusting it. Agent Shilakis told the court, “they did not seem to be a part of the Protest. They were in the back waling around, using concealment. I did not know what their intensions were”. Proving once again, that these government types are convicting you on what the THINK you might do! Agent Shilakis then told the court “I thought they were coming to start a firefight with the Federal Government. They brought guns and tactical equipment”. Agent Shilakis also told the court that, “the ICP was designed to collect the cattle and no one anticipated what happened on April 12, 2014”. Shilakis said, “these militia groups, they were just going to start shooting around”! Agent Shilakis said he was concerned for the people on the interstate and if there was shooting someone was going to be hurt. Yet the traffic was in continual movement and that only weapons pointed in the direction of the people on the interstate was the BLM/NPS!
Cross examination began with Richard Tanasi hammering at Agent Shilakis on his constant profiling concentrated on the street clothing of the Protestors. Although this was the focus of Agent Shilakis, Tanasi pointed out that during his testimony he pointed people out that were mistakenly identified by him as wearing camo when they weren’t. Tanasi asked him if he knew about the Nevada Highway Patrol truck in the vicinity of the Northbound bridge and Shilakis said “no, I didn’t know what truck that was”. Tanasi ended with asking Shilakis “how many times did you meet with the US Attorney’s Office”? Agent Shilakis said, “besides yesterday? About four times”. Richard Tanasi, while questioning Agent Shilakis brought up the fact that Shilakis didn’t write any of the details he was testifying to in his written report. Agent Shilakis said, “well of course, that is just my opinion, and I don’t put opinions in reports”! Tanasi also impeached Agent Shilakis’ testimony by showing portions of video that were not in the zoomed position saying, “this is what you could see with your naked eye”.
Todd Leventhal they took on the witness asking Agent Shilakis, “so you testified this guy was with the militia. You are saying that you know in totality what these people’s views and intentions are”. Leventhal produced a photo of the National Parks Service on scene and asked “well, what are these people wearing”? This was immediately objected to. Levnthal made the point to the Jury by saying, “can you point to each individual in this courtroom and tell me weather they are a Democrat or a Republican”? Which brought about another side bar. Leventhal was able to continue his questioning of Agent Shilakis by bringing up a photo of Dan Love wearing a black hat turned around backward with white on it, which drew objection by the Prosecution, because we all know, you cannot mention Dan Love’s name in the courtroom. The Defense is not allowed to bring any evidence the BLM/NPS was even there. During Leventhal’s questioning Agent Shilakis said, “well, it appears they are with the militia, I don’t actually know”. Courtroom observers say that you would need a high powered scope to pick these details out. What they were wearing, if they were carrying a firearm? These details were indistinguishable in the video, so how was Agent Shilakis able to give testimony to this fact” These government employees are just testifying to what the government has coached them to say. There testimony is not based on FACTS! The Defense was successful at getting Agent Shilakis to admit several times that he was wrong in his identification of these Protestors and their attire.
It was made evident in Agent Shilakis’ witness testimony that he didn’t even know who Eric Parker was. He was not asked to identify him in the courtroom. For all we know he didn’t even think Parker was in the courtroom! The Defense finally did something brilliant in court with Agent Shilakis, they asked, “why do you keep bringing up ‘black hat’? Don’t you mean Mr. Parker”? Requiring they use Parker’s name since it is HE that is on trial, NOT his black hat! Another bombshell! While playing part of Agent Shilakis’ video a voice over the radio was heard to have said, “sling your long-guns” TWICE! Evidence to the fact that that order was disobeyed by the BLM/NPS Agents! When the Defense questioned Shilakis about it he said, “well, that was a suggestion”. Elaborating in trying to defend the officers not doing as commanded Agent Shilakis said, “it was up to the discretion of those officers weather they felt like slinging their long-guns or not based on what they perceived as the intensions of the Protestors and what we perceived as threats”.
Now for the Jury questions for Agent Shilakis, “did anyone pointy a weapon at you”? The answer, “no”. Next question, “when you heard the comment to ’sling arms’, did that go for the BLM only, or every law enforcement officer there”? Agent Shilakis went in to a long-winded answer, the short version was, “any law enforcement officer can make the discretion of pointing or putting their weapon down at any time based on what they perceive as their threat. If they are in the crosshairs of someone else, and they hear ‘put your long-guns away’, they can base that decision on wether to put it away or not”. Giving credence to the fact that they were all a bunch of itchy finger trigger happy “shoot fist ask questions later” tools of the government! Last Jury question, “were you still concerned for you life when you saw law enforcement next tot he guy with a long-gun”? Agent Shilakis went in to another long diatribe saying, “I was worried about any loss of life” telling the Jury how he was, once again, concerned about the people who were “stopped” on the bridge. The fact is. If he and the other officers were SO concerned about the people in traffic on the bridge, they could have stopped the traffic, when the truth is, the traffic continued to move by slowly as there was a huge show of force by Las Vegas Metro and Nevada Highway Patrol on the Northbound bridge. Most of the Protestors where in the was down below, but the government was focused on those protecting the Protestors as the BLM/NPS had just told the Protestors over the loud speaker they were giving permission to use lethal force against them!
Todd Leventhal got up for re-cross examination after the Jury questions asking Agent Shilakis, “did you have a long-gun”? Agent Shilakis said, “he had one and it was slung the entire time”.
The Afternoon Session of court started without Eric Parker in a holding cell instead of being in the courtroom present at his own trial. Courtroom observers describe the court proceedings today was “ jaw-dropping . More jaw-dropping news from court today was Juror #1 gave a note to Judge Navarro today staring she received a text message from a male friend telling her “ he had two more hours to pass death sentences on these ‘prisoners'”. Judge Navarro asked her several questions trying to discern if she could still serve on the jury and remain impartial. The Defense showed concern and the Prosecution shuffled papers trusting Navarro would work her magic on the Juror. While trying to figure out what to do about Juror #1 it was disclosed that this Juror was also once married to someone from the National Parks Service. “Mistrial” is once again being thrown around. I mentioned before that I believe that if the government thinks this trial is not going to end up in a conviction they will call a mistrial. Courtroom observers agree with this fact.
FBI Special Agent Joel Willis has been in the courtroom for the duration of the trial. Agent Willis was also present everyday in the previous trial. Agent Willis was also present at the 1st trial in Oregon. Continually trying to build his case against The Patriots across this nation standing up to government overreach. Agent Willis is the Case Agent for the investigation in this trial. Agent Willis sits behind the Prosecution everyday in court. As was pointed out during his appearance last trial, today we have 3 Prosecuting Attorney’s, 5 FBI etc. Cronies and the Judge against 4 Defense Attorney’s. Usually, when witnesses are asked to testify, they are prevented from being a spectator in the galley until after they testify. The Judge told the Defense last trial that the Case Agent can be in the courtroom during proceedings and testify, once again making up the rules as she goes along. Judge Navarro claimed that if the Defendants get to be present while testimony is given and then also testify, so can the governments witnesses. I got some news for you Judge Navarro. If the Defendants were not present during their own trial and are convicted, this is called “convicted in absentia”. Basically the Prosecution is getting on the stand and giving their version of the facts, since Willis is sitting with the prosecution during proceedings. The Defense Attorney’s are not giving that privilege let alone the Defendants. Everything they wan to to dis funneled through Gloria Navarro’s filter. Then denied of coarse.
Today, Willis again, when called, gets up from his seat behind the Prosecution and walks to the stand. Willis testified last trial that he has spent thousands of hours looking at Facebook! Todd Engel reminds us what he hold the Jury last trial that "Willis has been able to listen to all the witnesses and has seen all the evidence”. Today Willis took the stand for the Prosecution to testify to the photo and video evidence presented as evidence in these two trials FILMED BY OTHER CIVILIANS! Because the governments equipment is sub-par. The government probably paid to much when it came to equipment or, like with LaVoy’s Ambush video, they purposely blur the lines to cover their own butts. Then, like today’s testimony from Willis, they take other photo and video evidence from independent sources and testify that it is their own. Last trial Dennis Michael Lynch, Shannon Bushman, Hugh Georgeon, and Alex Ellis, a stand-in for Michael Flynn, were witnesses for the Prosecution. But, since they were really hostile witnesses the Prosecution as exiled them from the courtroom, with the exception of Ellis, the tool that he is, and Willis is placing the governments claim on the photo and video evidence as their’s is pretty useless because you can’t identify anything in it. They are just using Lynch’s, Bushman’s, Georgeon, Flynn’s and others to corroborate their areal video shot at 12,000 feet. The government spared no expense when setting up their “entrapment crew” Longbow Productions as they set out to get the six men to incriminate themselves as the FBI was looking for a reason to prosecute them. Agent Willis along with the Prosecution has released photo and video evidence banned from the Defenses Discovery and the public eye to PBS for their government propaganda Frontline. The government is now USING the Frontline video as evidence in court! Because they want the Jury to see the governments skewed narrative and convict these guys! They are using the Frontline video to create their own independent timeline, aside from the timestamped evidence provided. All of this just confirms, once again, that the government has no case! They can only have success convicting these guys if the government controls the narrative and skews the evidence through their lens. In the last trial while Todd Engel was acting as his own Attorney Engel established the fact that through his evidence it proves that the BLM/Parks Service had their weapons pointed at protestors for a very long time, and this is the evidence Willis is trying to conceal! He established the timeline as 12:05-12:50 p.m. Engel spent almost 2 full hours drilling down on his evidence presented during the questioning of Willis. We the people want PBS to be prosecuted for releasing protected discovery! The government can’t play favorites! If you are releasing protected discover to PBS RELEASE IT TO THE DEFENSE and let the people see it as it is produced in court! Las Vegas Review Journal has been requesting the Longbow video since the first trial began, and they have been denied. Another jaw-dropper. Agent Willis presented media evidence in court today that was pulled off of Facebook two days prior, and was just posted recently. Does the Prosecution have any rules! Willis claims “it is open source”, so if anyone can see it, we can capture it and use it", but NOT when it was posted YESTERDAY! Things posted on Facebook are edited and embellished all the time, and to use that as an accurate representation is just his opinion NOT FACT! Agent Willis also is testifying that he can tell what time a photo was taken by looking at a persons shadow, although this was one of the ways the Zapruder Film was used to further the governments narrative on the Murder Of JFK.
Another way the Prosecution/Judge are deceiving the Jury is by not letting them know that certain discoveries were made in the last trial that exposed the governments tactics of manipulating the evidence to suit their needs at the time. One example is the government witnesses identifying “tan hat” as Todd Engel in the first trial, and in this trial they are identifying “tan hat” as someone completely different, but the Defense can not mention this to the Jury noting the previous trial, but have to say instead “previous hearing”, totally misrepresenting the fact that these men are being tried twice for the same crime, and this Jury just might see through this! Agent Willis, through his witness testimony, is showing lots of men in camo at the stage event who aren't even charged in this case, to portray anyone who wears camo as scary and dangerous. These men on trial are not even part of the Arizona Militia or Oathkeepers. Three of these men were wearing street clothes! Again, guilt by association!
The Prosecution called Special Agent Robert Shilakis from the Bureau Of Land Management to the stand. There is, apparently some video that Agent Shilakis took at the events at Bundy Ranch. During Agent Shilakis’ testimony he showed his video and talked a lot about what people were wearing, using this the profile the Protestors. The fact is, if they had a weapon, they were a threat to him, although there were no shots fired, no injuries on the day of April 12, 2017 accept for the BLM’s ego. Agent Shilakis showed an example of a man standing up with his weapon slung over this shoulder. The man takes a hold of the sling and swung in back. This was said to be by the Agent as pointing his weapon, although the man was just adjusting it. Agent Shilakis told the court, “they did not seem to be a part of the Protest. They were in the back waling around, using concealment. I did not know what their intensions were”. Proving once again, that these government types are convicting you on what the THINK you might do! Agent Shilakis then told the court “I thought they were coming to start a firefight with the Federal Government. They brought guns and tactical equipment”. Agent Shilakis also told the court that, “the ICP was designed to collect the cattle and no one anticipated what happened on April 12, 2014”. Shilakis said, “these militia groups, they were just going to start shooting around”! Agent Shilakis said he was concerned for the people on the interstate and if there was shooting someone was going to be hurt. Yet the traffic was in continual movement and that only weapons pointed in the direction of the people on the interstate was the BLM/NPS!
Cross examination began with Richard Tanasi hammering at Agent Shilakis on his constant profiling concentrated on the street clothing of the Protestors. Although this was the focus of Agent Shilakis, Tanasi pointed out that during his testimony he pointed people out that were mistakenly identified by him as wearing camo when they weren’t. Tanasi asked him if he knew about the Nevada Highway Patrol truck in the vicinity of the Northbound bridge and Shilakis said “no, I didn’t know what truck that was”. Tanasi ended with asking Shilakis “how many times did you meet with the US Attorney’s Office”? Agent Shilakis said, “besides yesterday? About four times”. Richard Tanasi, while questioning Agent Shilakis brought up the fact that Shilakis didn’t write any of the details he was testifying to in his written report. Agent Shilakis said, “well of course, that is just my opinion, and I don’t put opinions in reports”! Tanasi also impeached Agent Shilakis’ testimony by showing portions of video that were not in the zoomed position saying, “this is what you could see with your naked eye”.
Todd Leventhal they took on the witness asking Agent Shilakis, “so you testified this guy was with the militia. You are saying that you know in totality what these people’s views and intentions are”. Leventhal produced a photo of the National Parks Service on scene and asked “well, what are these people wearing”? This was immediately objected to. Levnthal made the point to the Jury by saying, “can you point to each individual in this courtroom and tell me weather they are a Democrat or a Republican”? Which brought about another side bar. Leventhal was able to continue his questioning of Agent Shilakis by bringing up a photo of Dan Love wearing a black hat turned around backward with white on it, which drew objection by the Prosecution, because we all know, you cannot mention Dan Love’s name in the courtroom. The Defense is not allowed to bring any evidence the BLM/NPS was even there. During Leventhal’s questioning Agent Shilakis said, “well, it appears they are with the militia, I don’t actually know”. Courtroom observers say that you would need a high powered scope to pick these details out. What they were wearing, if they were carrying a firearm? These details were indistinguishable in the video, so how was Agent Shilakis able to give testimony to this fact” These government employees are just testifying to what the government has coached them to say. There testimony is not based on FACTS! The Defense was successful at getting Agent Shilakis to admit several times that he was wrong in his identification of these Protestors and their attire.
It was made evident in Agent Shilakis’ witness testimony that he didn’t even know who Eric Parker was. He was not asked to identify him in the courtroom. For all we know he didn’t even think Parker was in the courtroom! The Defense finally did something brilliant in court with Agent Shilakis, they asked, “why do you keep bringing up ‘black hat’? Don’t you mean Mr. Parker”? Requiring they use Parker’s name since it is HE that is on trial, NOT his black hat! Another bombshell! While playing part of Agent Shilakis’ video a voice over the radio was heard to have said, “sling your long-guns” TWICE! Evidence to the fact that that order was disobeyed by the BLM/NPS Agents! When the Defense questioned Shilakis about it he said, “well, that was a suggestion”. Elaborating in trying to defend the officers not doing as commanded Agent Shilakis said, “it was up to the discretion of those officers weather they felt like slinging their long-guns or not based on what they perceived as the intensions of the Protestors and what we perceived as threats”.
Now for the Jury questions for Agent Shilakis, “did anyone pointy a weapon at you”? The answer, “no”. Next question, “when you heard the comment to ’sling arms’, did that go for the BLM only, or every law enforcement officer there”? Agent Shilakis went in to a long-winded answer, the short version was, “any law enforcement officer can make the discretion of pointing or putting their weapon down at any time based on what they perceive as their threat. If they are in the crosshairs of someone else, and they hear ‘put your long-guns away’, they can base that decision on wether to put it away or not”. Giving credence to the fact that they were all a bunch of itchy finger trigger happy “shoot fist ask questions later” tools of the government! Last Jury question, “were you still concerned for you life when you saw law enforcement next tot he guy with a long-gun”? Agent Shilakis went in to another long diatribe saying, “I was worried about any loss of life” telling the Jury how he was, once again, concerned about the people who were “stopped” on the bridge. The fact is. If he and the other officers were SO concerned about the people in traffic on the bridge, they could have stopped the traffic, when the truth is, the traffic continued to move by slowly as there was a huge show of force by Las Vegas Metro and Nevada Highway Patrol on the Northbound bridge. Most of the Protestors where in the was down below, but the government was focused on those protecting the Protestors as the BLM/NPS had just told the Protestors over the loud speaker they were giving permission to use lethal force against them!
Todd Leventhal got up for re-cross examination after the Jury questions asking Agent Shilakis, “did you have a long-gun”? Agent Shilakis said, “he had one and it was slung the entire time”.
The Afternoon Session of court started without Eric Parker in a holding cell instead of being in the courtroom present at his own trial. Courtroom observers describe the court proceedings today was “ jaw-dropping . More jaw-dropping news from court today was Juror #1 gave a note to Judge Navarro today staring she received a text message from a male friend telling her “ he had two more hours to pass death sentences on these ‘prisoners'”. Judge Navarro asked her several questions trying to discern if she could still serve on the jury and remain impartial. The Defense showed concern and the Prosecution shuffled papers trusting Navarro would work her magic on the Juror. While trying to figure out what to do about Juror #1 it was disclosed that this Juror was also once married to someone from the National Parks Service. “Mistrial” is once again being thrown around. I mentioned before that I believe that if the government thinks this trial is not going to end up in a conviction they will call a mistrial. Courtroom observers agree with this fact.
FBI Special Agent Joel Willis has been in the courtroom for the duration of the trial. Agent Willis was also present everyday in the previous trial. Agent Willis was also present at the 1st trial in Oregon. Continually trying to build his case against The Patriots across this nation standing up to government overreach. Agent Willis is the Case Agent for the investigation in this trial. Agent Willis sits behind the Prosecution everyday in court. As was pointed out during his appearance last trial, today we have 3 Prosecuting Attorney’s, 5 FBI etc. Cronies and the Judge against 4 Defense Attorney’s. Usually, when witnesses are asked to testify, they are prevented from being a spectator in the galley until after they testify. The Judge told the Defense last trial that the Case Agent can be in the courtroom during proceedings and testify, once again making up the rules as she goes along. Judge Navarro claimed that if the Defendants get to be present while testimony is given and then also testify, so can the governments witnesses. I got some news for you Judge Navarro. If the Defendants were not present during their own trial and are convicted, this is called “convicted in absentia”. Basically the Prosecution is getting on the stand and giving their version of the facts, since Willis is sitting with the prosecution during proceedings. The Defense Attorney’s are not giving that privilege let alone the Defendants. Everything they wan to to dis funneled through Gloria Navarro’s filter. Then denied of coarse.
Today, Willis again, when called, gets up from his seat behind the Prosecution and walks to the stand. Willis testified last trial that he has spent thousands of hours looking at Facebook! Todd Engel reminds us what he hold the Jury last trial that "Willis has been able to listen to all the witnesses and has seen all the evidence”. Today Willis took the stand for the Prosecution to testify to the photo and video evidence presented as evidence in these two trials FILMED BY OTHER CIVILIANS! Because the governments equipment is sub-par. The government probably paid to much when it came to equipment or, like with LaVoy’s Ambush video, they purposely blur the lines to cover their own butts. Then, like today’s testimony from Willis, they take other photo and video evidence from independent sources and testify that it is their own. Last trial Dennis Michael Lynch, Shannon Bushman, Hugh Georgeon, and Alex Ellis, a stand-in for Michael Flynn, were witnesses for the Prosecution. But, since they were really hostile witnesses the Prosecution as exiled them from the courtroom, with the exception of Ellis, the tool that he is, and Willis is placing the governments claim on the photo and video evidence as their’s is pretty useless because you can’t identify anything in it. They are just using Lynch’s, Bushman’s, Georgeon, Flynn’s and others to corroborate their areal video shot at 12,000 feet. The government spared no expense when setting up their “entrapment crew” Longbow Productions as they set out to get the six men to incriminate themselves as the FBI was looking for a reason to prosecute them. Agent Willis along with the Prosecution has released photo and video evidence banned from the Defenses Discovery and the public eye to PBS for their government propaganda Frontline. The government is now USING the Frontline video as evidence in court! Because they want the Jury to see the governments skewed narrative and convict these guys! They are using the Frontline video to create their own independent timeline, aside from the timestamped evidence provided. All of this just confirms, once again, that the government has no case! They can only have success convicting these guys if the government controls the narrative and skews the evidence through their lens. In the last trial while Todd Engel was acting as his own Attorney Engel established the fact that through his evidence it proves that the BLM/Parks Service had their weapons pointed at protestors for a very long time, and this is the evidence Willis is trying to conceal! He established the timeline as 12:05-12:50 p.m. Engel spent almost 2 full hours drilling down on his evidence presented during the questioning of Willis. We the people want PBS to be prosecuted for releasing protected discovery! The government can’t play favorites! If you are releasing protected discover to PBS RELEASE IT TO THE DEFENSE and let the people see it as it is produced in court! Las Vegas Review Journal has been requesting the Longbow video since the first trial began, and they have been denied. Another jaw-dropper. Agent Willis presented media evidence in court today that was pulled off of Facebook two days prior, and was just posted recently. Does the Prosecution have any rules! Willis claims “it is open source”, so if anyone can see it, we can capture it and use it", but NOT when it was posted YESTERDAY! Things posted on Facebook are edited and embellished all the time, and to use that as an accurate representation is just his opinion NOT FACT! Agent Willis also is testifying that he can tell what time a photo was taken by looking at a persons shadow, although this was one of the ways the Zapruder Film was used to further the governments narrative on the Murder Of JFK.
Another way the Prosecution/Judge are deceiving the Jury is by not letting them know that certain discoveries were made in the last trial that exposed the governments tactics of manipulating the evidence to suit their needs at the time. One example is the government witnesses identifying “tan hat” as Todd Engel in the first trial, and in this trial they are identifying “tan hat” as someone completely different, but the Defense can not mention this to the Jury noting the previous trial, but have to say instead “previous hearing”, totally misrepresenting the fact that these men are being tried twice for the same crime, and this Jury just might see through this! Agent Willis, through his witness testimony, is showing lots of men in camo at the stage event who aren't even charged in this case, to portray anyone who wears camo as scary and dangerous. These men on trial are not even part of the Arizona Militia or Oathkeepers. Three of these men were wearing street clothes! Again, guilt by association!
July 27, 2017
Here is a short synopsis of what went on in court. The video feed was cut, so this is all I have. There wasn’t a lot of detail in this one. I’ll try to make sense of it.
One of the most important things that happened in court today steamed from a Jury question quoted as follows, “why can’t we see videos from better angles from the position of the witness”? Judge Gloria Navarro will not let the witness answer the question, she takes it upon herself by saying, “that is not a reasonable expectation. Most cases don’t have video or photo evidence, just testimony”. The truth about this case is that there are tons of video and photo evidence from concerned citizens, news media, and government agencies, most of which were plastered all over the internet including social media, most of it wiped clean form government and Google. As government pushed to get Body Cam/Dash Cam on all their officers, that source also exists. This video in particular has been used by Law Enforcement to justify officer’s actions while committing crime or enforcing “the law”, but the government also keeps this footage out of court when it suits their needs, as in this second trial. The Jury knows they are not seeing all the evidence and they are calling the government out on it. Judge Navarro is purposely misleading the Jury into thinking this evidence does not exist. The Prosecution in concert with the Judge are deliberately limiting photo and video evidence, providing a small controlled snapshot of what went on in April 2014. Although this was the biggest news story of 2014, the government is only providing evidence for a small portion of the media that exists on the event, unless it is Facebook memes and posts against the Defendants. The Prosecution is limiting this real-time evidence, controlling the narrative, so the Jury once deliberating won’t have the opportunity to look at that evidence unimpeded by the government. The Jury has shown by their questions that there is a lot of censorship going on in the trial and commonsense tells them there is Body Cam/Dash Cam evidence available that is not being allowed in court. Judge Navarro also told the Jury “not to take anything the Attorney’s say as evidence and if you ever hear an objection or anything like that. Don’t try to understand what the objections are. Don’t try to imagine what the answer would be, that’s not considered evidence either”.
It was disclosed in testimony of today’s witness, that he met with the US Attorney’s Office just yesterday, based on the Jury questions! This revealed that this is why Judge Navarro is allowing the Jury to ask questions. So they can tailor their approach. After they talked to this witness yesterday he came to court today saying things like, “I took an oath to protect the Constitution”, and the witness was allowed to talk about the First/Second Amendment, which has been quashed by the government in these proceedings.
Today’s witness called by the Prosecution is Ranger Edwin Whitteaker currently serving in the Bureau Of Land Management, formerly with the US Border Patrol and the Bureau Of Alcohol Tobacco And Firearms. Further proving my theory of a militarized, brainwashed government employee poised against the American People who sees them as the enemy. The reporter makes reference to, what I and others have said, "the government is creating their own standing army against the people, who are used to dealing with non-American’s on the border. They are heavy handed coming from either Secret Service, Border Patrol, BATF”. And, "when you think about BLM/NPS/USFW you think of someone who polices your “catch” or ammo. I don’t think of a Border Patrol Agent ready to take my life. That is what the BLM/NPS etc are today, and it’s happening at an alarming rate”! Ranger Edwin Whitteaker is currently a K-9 Handler who showed up in Bunkerville on April 10, Although Judge Gloria Navarro has forbidden any testimony outside of April 12, 2014. While Ranger Edwin Whitteaker was present on April 9th that too will be censored by the Judge. Ranger Whitteaker “talked about the ‘cover’ and any of the long-guns could go through the trucks”, that “it was a powder-keg out there that day”. Saying, “there was women and children in that crowd. I wouldn’t have been able to take the shot if I wanted to because there were women and children in the crowd. I would only be able to take the shot if it was clear”. He told the court that he is responsible for accounting for each bullet he fires and he was worried about ricochet’s. Ranger Whitaker told how he was hired to “uphold Federal Law and uphold the Constitution”. The Prosecution had Ranger Edwin Whitteaker identify Steven Stewart, Scott Drexler and Eric Parker. Ranger Whitaker testified he thought Steven Stewart had a shotgun that da, begging the question how effective would a shotgun from the Northbound bridge become lethal to someone who was so far away? Ranger Whitteaker testified to “a man with sunglasses and beige vest” referring to Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien.
The reporter said they are “really in shock and awe how much Todd Engel goes on trial” in a case he is not included in this go around. “They have waited until Todd Engel is out of the room. Last trial evidence was shown of Todd Engel present the entire time on April 12 with Nevada State Highway Patrol", striking the video evidence of Engel, but using his conviction against the other four who remain on trial now. Controlling the narrative and the evidence that would clear them all, but instead, trying to convict these four using, “guilt by association”.
In further questioning, Ranger Edwin Whitteaker told the court that the behavior of one man on scene was evidence of him pointing a weapon. Ranger Whitteaker portrayed this man as having his weapon slung over his shoulder resting on his back, and by the man turning from side to side and pacing, this was described by Whitteaker as “pointing his weapon”, so whenever the gun was visible in Whitteaker’s direction he was under danger of being shot! Ranger Whitteaker then told the court how he works with drug smugglers with hundreds of pounds of drugs, going on high speed chases, knowing that they are armed, but this situation was the most scared he’d ever been in his life, referring to the events he was present for at Bundy Ranch.
Cross examination included these questions, “are you aware that the operation was over on April 11, 2014”? Whitteaker’s answer was “no”.
What was evident because of today’s proceeding was that the information these officers had was extremely lacking. Although the Prosecution is limiting what the Defense can bring up as evidence against the government and their heavy-handedness, it is becoming very evident that their communication during these events was EXTREMELY lacking.
Richard Tanasi questioned Ranger Edwin Whitteaker about Nevada Highway Patrol. Tanasi described the officer on scene being on the bridge, having binoculars, and dawning lime green vests. Ranger Whitteaker said that he saw Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien and the top of the NHP car, but doesn’t see the officer’s in the lime green vests. Although there is video evidence of Todd being with the officers the entire time 0f the event. Next, Nadia Ahmed, US Attorney’s Office Prosecutor got up and said, “it was NOT, your honor”! Giggling, and with an attitude. Tanasi calmly said, “Council is testifying”. Judge Navarro just ignored it and let court proceed as normal. If this had been an Attorney for the Defense, as experienced by Tanasi several times, there would have been a side bar and he would have been harassed by the Judge, but Ahmed can get away with theatrics at a time when her witness is being discredited.
An important observation made by several in the courtroom today. The witnesses for the Prosecution have no concept of the time of day. When the Defense questions the witnesses on details regarding their movement and behavior they become hostile witnesses in that they have been coached by the US Attorney’s Office to not answer the questions about time of day etc. so they are not accountable for their behavior. The witnesses can’t even accurately describe the vehicles they are photographed hiding behind and cannot accurately make important things on the markup screen.
Questioning resumed. Ranger Edwin Whitteaker talked about the “fatal funnel” and that he can’t see it with the evidence the Defense is providing him. Whitteaker told the Jury that "the gunmen” controlled the high ground although there is evidence to the contrary since McEwen was in the plane and there were snipers on the bluff! Todd Leventhal produced areal footage of the horses coming into the wash. While showing this evidence the Judge objects and calls a side bar. Prosecutor Nadia Ahmed argued that Ranger Whitaker was not there at the time. Leventhal, within earshot of the Jury said, “I am trying to prove that the men didn’t always have the high ground”. Judge Navarro ended up forbidding the evidence from being produced.
Jury questions. First, “could you see through the break in the Northbound and Southbound barriers and if so could you have taken the shot”? Ranger Edwin Whitteaker said, “I would not have shot, unless, I had a clear shot”, once again proving the point that everyday Americans dressed in street clothes with weapons are a danger to these people aside from the government they work for. Next the Jury asks, “can the Jury ever see the evidence from the officer’s position”? Judge Navarro answered this one saying, “it is unusual to have this many photos and videos. They cannot provide this video to you”, trying to mislead the Jury and control the evidence provided to them. The Jury then asked “if anyone carrying a weapon is a threat”? The reporter fails to give the answer to this one. Next, “do you feel the defendant intent was to kill agents and federal officers that day”? Ranger Whitteaker answered, “yes”. This concluded Ranger Edwin Whitteaker’s testimony.
Next up for the Prosecution, Ranger Martinez who hails from Anchorage Alaska, serving with the Bureau Of Land Management for 14 years. Martinez worked at the Department Of Defense in Utah, the Department Of Commerce and the Department Of Homeland Security, once again proving the point of a militarized police force. A Standing Army against free Americans. The highlights of Ranger Martinez’s testimony include, Richard Tanasi asking, “did a Las Vegas Metro Officer come and ask you to put your weapons away”? Tanasi’s question drew objection where another side bar ensued and Tanasi was prevented from continuing with the question. The only real thing Ranger Martinez testified to was that he could see Eric Parker’s gun barrel protruding out of the cement barrier on the Northbound bridge. Martinez’s testimony was very short, only making identifications mainly. He was a reluctant witness and kept his head down the entire time on the stand.
One of the most important things that happened in court today steamed from a Jury question quoted as follows, “why can’t we see videos from better angles from the position of the witness”? Judge Gloria Navarro will not let the witness answer the question, she takes it upon herself by saying, “that is not a reasonable expectation. Most cases don’t have video or photo evidence, just testimony”. The truth about this case is that there are tons of video and photo evidence from concerned citizens, news media, and government agencies, most of which were plastered all over the internet including social media, most of it wiped clean form government and Google. As government pushed to get Body Cam/Dash Cam on all their officers, that source also exists. This video in particular has been used by Law Enforcement to justify officer’s actions while committing crime or enforcing “the law”, but the government also keeps this footage out of court when it suits their needs, as in this second trial. The Jury knows they are not seeing all the evidence and they are calling the government out on it. Judge Navarro is purposely misleading the Jury into thinking this evidence does not exist. The Prosecution in concert with the Judge are deliberately limiting photo and video evidence, providing a small controlled snapshot of what went on in April 2014. Although this was the biggest news story of 2014, the government is only providing evidence for a small portion of the media that exists on the event, unless it is Facebook memes and posts against the Defendants. The Prosecution is limiting this real-time evidence, controlling the narrative, so the Jury once deliberating won’t have the opportunity to look at that evidence unimpeded by the government. The Jury has shown by their questions that there is a lot of censorship going on in the trial and commonsense tells them there is Body Cam/Dash Cam evidence available that is not being allowed in court. Judge Navarro also told the Jury “not to take anything the Attorney’s say as evidence and if you ever hear an objection or anything like that. Don’t try to understand what the objections are. Don’t try to imagine what the answer would be, that’s not considered evidence either”.
It was disclosed in testimony of today’s witness, that he met with the US Attorney’s Office just yesterday, based on the Jury questions! This revealed that this is why Judge Navarro is allowing the Jury to ask questions. So they can tailor their approach. After they talked to this witness yesterday he came to court today saying things like, “I took an oath to protect the Constitution”, and the witness was allowed to talk about the First/Second Amendment, which has been quashed by the government in these proceedings.
Today’s witness called by the Prosecution is Ranger Edwin Whitteaker currently serving in the Bureau Of Land Management, formerly with the US Border Patrol and the Bureau Of Alcohol Tobacco And Firearms. Further proving my theory of a militarized, brainwashed government employee poised against the American People who sees them as the enemy. The reporter makes reference to, what I and others have said, "the government is creating their own standing army against the people, who are used to dealing with non-American’s on the border. They are heavy handed coming from either Secret Service, Border Patrol, BATF”. And, "when you think about BLM/NPS/USFW you think of someone who polices your “catch” or ammo. I don’t think of a Border Patrol Agent ready to take my life. That is what the BLM/NPS etc are today, and it’s happening at an alarming rate”! Ranger Edwin Whitteaker is currently a K-9 Handler who showed up in Bunkerville on April 10, Although Judge Gloria Navarro has forbidden any testimony outside of April 12, 2014. While Ranger Edwin Whitteaker was present on April 9th that too will be censored by the Judge. Ranger Whitteaker “talked about the ‘cover’ and any of the long-guns could go through the trucks”, that “it was a powder-keg out there that day”. Saying, “there was women and children in that crowd. I wouldn’t have been able to take the shot if I wanted to because there were women and children in the crowd. I would only be able to take the shot if it was clear”. He told the court that he is responsible for accounting for each bullet he fires and he was worried about ricochet’s. Ranger Whitaker told how he was hired to “uphold Federal Law and uphold the Constitution”. The Prosecution had Ranger Edwin Whitteaker identify Steven Stewart, Scott Drexler and Eric Parker. Ranger Whitaker testified he thought Steven Stewart had a shotgun that da, begging the question how effective would a shotgun from the Northbound bridge become lethal to someone who was so far away? Ranger Whitteaker testified to “a man with sunglasses and beige vest” referring to Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien.
The reporter said they are “really in shock and awe how much Todd Engel goes on trial” in a case he is not included in this go around. “They have waited until Todd Engel is out of the room. Last trial evidence was shown of Todd Engel present the entire time on April 12 with Nevada State Highway Patrol", striking the video evidence of Engel, but using his conviction against the other four who remain on trial now. Controlling the narrative and the evidence that would clear them all, but instead, trying to convict these four using, “guilt by association”.
In further questioning, Ranger Edwin Whitteaker told the court that the behavior of one man on scene was evidence of him pointing a weapon. Ranger Whitteaker portrayed this man as having his weapon slung over his shoulder resting on his back, and by the man turning from side to side and pacing, this was described by Whitteaker as “pointing his weapon”, so whenever the gun was visible in Whitteaker’s direction he was under danger of being shot! Ranger Whitteaker then told the court how he works with drug smugglers with hundreds of pounds of drugs, going on high speed chases, knowing that they are armed, but this situation was the most scared he’d ever been in his life, referring to the events he was present for at Bundy Ranch.
Cross examination included these questions, “are you aware that the operation was over on April 11, 2014”? Whitteaker’s answer was “no”.
What was evident because of today’s proceeding was that the information these officers had was extremely lacking. Although the Prosecution is limiting what the Defense can bring up as evidence against the government and their heavy-handedness, it is becoming very evident that their communication during these events was EXTREMELY lacking.
Richard Tanasi questioned Ranger Edwin Whitteaker about Nevada Highway Patrol. Tanasi described the officer on scene being on the bridge, having binoculars, and dawning lime green vests. Ranger Whitteaker said that he saw Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien and the top of the NHP car, but doesn’t see the officer’s in the lime green vests. Although there is video evidence of Todd being with the officers the entire time 0f the event. Next, Nadia Ahmed, US Attorney’s Office Prosecutor got up and said, “it was NOT, your honor”! Giggling, and with an attitude. Tanasi calmly said, “Council is testifying”. Judge Navarro just ignored it and let court proceed as normal. If this had been an Attorney for the Defense, as experienced by Tanasi several times, there would have been a side bar and he would have been harassed by the Judge, but Ahmed can get away with theatrics at a time when her witness is being discredited.
An important observation made by several in the courtroom today. The witnesses for the Prosecution have no concept of the time of day. When the Defense questions the witnesses on details regarding their movement and behavior they become hostile witnesses in that they have been coached by the US Attorney’s Office to not answer the questions about time of day etc. so they are not accountable for their behavior. The witnesses can’t even accurately describe the vehicles they are photographed hiding behind and cannot accurately make important things on the markup screen.
Questioning resumed. Ranger Edwin Whitteaker talked about the “fatal funnel” and that he can’t see it with the evidence the Defense is providing him. Whitteaker told the Jury that "the gunmen” controlled the high ground although there is evidence to the contrary since McEwen was in the plane and there were snipers on the bluff! Todd Leventhal produced areal footage of the horses coming into the wash. While showing this evidence the Judge objects and calls a side bar. Prosecutor Nadia Ahmed argued that Ranger Whitaker was not there at the time. Leventhal, within earshot of the Jury said, “I am trying to prove that the men didn’t always have the high ground”. Judge Navarro ended up forbidding the evidence from being produced.
Jury questions. First, “could you see through the break in the Northbound and Southbound barriers and if so could you have taken the shot”? Ranger Edwin Whitteaker said, “I would not have shot, unless, I had a clear shot”, once again proving the point that everyday Americans dressed in street clothes with weapons are a danger to these people aside from the government they work for. Next the Jury asks, “can the Jury ever see the evidence from the officer’s position”? Judge Navarro answered this one saying, “it is unusual to have this many photos and videos. They cannot provide this video to you”, trying to mislead the Jury and control the evidence provided to them. The Jury then asked “if anyone carrying a weapon is a threat”? The reporter fails to give the answer to this one. Next, “do you feel the defendant intent was to kill agents and federal officers that day”? Ranger Whitteaker answered, “yes”. This concluded Ranger Edwin Whitteaker’s testimony.
Next up for the Prosecution, Ranger Martinez who hails from Anchorage Alaska, serving with the Bureau Of Land Management for 14 years. Martinez worked at the Department Of Defense in Utah, the Department Of Commerce and the Department Of Homeland Security, once again proving the point of a militarized police force. A Standing Army against free Americans. The highlights of Ranger Martinez’s testimony include, Richard Tanasi asking, “did a Las Vegas Metro Officer come and ask you to put your weapons away”? Tanasi’s question drew objection where another side bar ensued and Tanasi was prevented from continuing with the question. The only real thing Ranger Martinez testified to was that he could see Eric Parker’s gun barrel protruding out of the cement barrier on the Northbound bridge. Martinez’s testimony was very short, only making identifications mainly. He was a reluctant witness and kept his head down the entire time on the stand.
Ranger Martinez they took on some Jury questions like, “how were you communicating with the difference law enforcement on the scene”? Ranger Martinez answering, “when Metro showed up they started issuing orders, prior to that day we had zero communication with Metro and NHP”. Martinez then told the Jury that at one point the Las Vegas Metro asked him to put away his gun. At this point US Attorney Erin Creegan starts talking over the witness so the Jury cannot hear Martinez’s answer. Judge Navarro then interrupts demanding the Ranger Martinez "just tell the court HOW, verbally, over the radio”? Ranger Martinez answered, “verbally, once, that one time”. The Jury then asked Ranger Martinez, “who was your supervisor”? His response, “Logan Brisco”. Next question, “what does the term ‘non-responsive’ and ‘hostile witness’ mean”? Judge Navarro butted in and told the Jury “don’t worry about what objections are and don’t try to guess the answers. Don’t worry about what non-responsive is or hostile witness, that’s for me to worry about. All you guys need to worry about is the evidence that is entered”. The video recording of the reporter, at this time, is cut off, although they do not seem to be done filing their report.
July 26, 2017
The day at the courthouse started off with Greg Burleson’s Sentencing Hearing. Judge Gloria Navarro sentenced him to 70 years and 3 months and 3 month probation if he lives that long! (135 months minimum 57 years mandatory minimum for 924c/Firearm charges). Navarro is just proving how incompetent she is by requiring probation, because he will never live out his sentence. We must rethink the Mandatory Minimum Laws our Congress is giving us. It must be evident to you all that THEY PLAN TO INCARCERATE US ALL! Not need for FEMA Camps! This only ensures that the Government earn a dollar through their Prisons for Profit Industrial Complex! Giving him leniency, after Tereence Jackson requested Burleson get credit for being a Government Informant and for his Alcoholism and Health Problems. He was, in the end, also convicted of Terrorism against the Government. Judge Navarro also is requiring he pay his portion of over 1.5 million dollars, split among all the defendants. She said the American People need to reimbursed for the failed cattle rustling operation. Navarro also scolded Burleson and said that the government suffered at the hands of “school yard bullies”. She often looked at the Federal Employees in the room while reading him the riot act on the mayhem they caused, when in reality we all know that it was the Bureau Of Land Management and their cohorts who perpetrated their “school yard bully’ tactics on the Bundy Family starting with assaulting Davey Bundy for taking photos of them doing their dirty deeds from the side of the road, kidnapping him and holding him hostage for 24 hours in Las Vegas an hour and a half from Bunkerville. Sicking their dogs on the Bundy Family while trying to keep them from damaging their property and kidnapping and killing their cattle. Tasing Ammon Bundy 4 times and body slamming Cliven’s sister from behind, not to mention arresting and brutalizing other supporters on the outskirts of town as Bundy neighbors witnessed the criminal activity the BLM was doing, they being called off hillsides and roadways being frisked, shaken down and brutalized, much of which has received little press coverage. Navarro associated much of the cost lost by the government to the fabrication that the cattle rustling operation costed over 1.5 million dollars in Contract Cowboy fees. Ya! The American People want their money back, because they are picking up the tab for a tyrannical government being DEPLOYED against them!
Channel 8 News showed up for the 3 time for both trials and sentencing. They do not sit in on the proceedings, they just show up on the courtroom steps to harass the courtroom observers and the Defendants Family members, asking inflammatory questions. The last time they showed up was for Greg Burleson being found to be an FBI informant bad-mouthing the guy throughout the report. Today they tried to do the same, harassing the courtroom observers, trying to get intel since they were to lazy to go in an view the proceedings. Burleson’s parents were in attendance and Channel 8 followed them relentlessly while trying to leave the courthouse. The courtroom observers were able to create a barrier for the Burleson’s to minimize the harassment by Channel 8 News.
Court resumed for the other 4 men with Special Agent Scott Swanson on the stand for the Prosecution. Agent Swanson began by telling the court about “black hat and tan hat” and how Swanson profiled them because of what they were wearing and how they were moving, proving that these officers are being programmed to profile Americans in civilian clothes bearing arms as Terrorists! Just lest your imagination run wild! Set up your own scenario and run with it! Shoot first, ask questions later mentality being programmed into government ops who see the Constitution as an enemy of the State! Agent Swanson gave testimony to the fact that he had “the safety off, the slack off “, and he was ready to take black hat out! Agent Swanson testified that black hat and tan hat kept bobbing up and down. Photos were produced where he identified the two. Agent Swanson continued to proudly boast that he was ready to shoot these two individuals, that he was scoping the crowd, as he has his weapon fixed upon them “assessing threats”.
The Courtroom Observers said the the cross examination portion of Special Agent Scott Swanson was really well done. Only a few highlights were mentioned, and is as follows. In cross examination Jess Marchese presented several photos of Eric Parker and Scott Drexler and asked Agent Swanson to identify the two men known as black hat and tan hat in each of the photos. In the first set of photos Agent Swanson correctly identifies the two men. In the second set of photos Agent Swanson points out the two he thinks are the men. When Marchese produced a closer view of the photos the man is now in a standing position and it is clear to the court it is NOT Scott Drexler. Todd Leventhal tried to get Agent Swanson’s Body Cam footage where you can hear him say, “this is a shoot first, ask questions later scenario”, entered into evidence. It was allowed in the first trial, but Judge Gloria Navarro will not allow it in this trial. Judge Navarro has made a ruling that the only Body Cam footage allowed in the court is that that is muted so you cannot hear what the officers are saying. It is shocking to note that after this ruling against the Defense showing this video footage, the Prosecution shows the exact same clip WITH THE AUDIO! If this isn’t the essence of hypocrisy!
The Jury questions followed cross examination by the Defense Attorneys. Question one, “‘black hat’ had magazines on his vest. Could you tell if the magazines were for a long-gun or a handgun”? Agent Scott Swanson answered in the affirmative, “they were for a handgun”. Next, “when you saw the men pointing a weapon at you, what was your reaction”? Agent Swanson said, “my training kicked in and my first reaction was to shoot”! Next, “how did you control your emotions”? Agent Swanson’s reply, “I tried to focus on working and breathing”, Swanson tried to expound on his dark humor that is heard on his Body Cam footage trying to cover his tracks for such behavior, but he is stopped and unable to continue. Next question, “when people are yelling at you calling you traitors, what were your thoughts”? Swanson displayed much of the teary-eyed emotion he displayed in the last trial when he tells the Jury, “I put my life on the line for American Citizens, and they are now calling me a traitor. I started my service to America early on. Next, “were you aware that Law Enforcement was on the bridge”? Answering “no”. “Did you see people in the wash as threats or just the people on the bridge”? Agent Swanson said that he had and obstructed view of the people in the wash, but his main focus was the people on the bridge. Next, “did you hear any verbal threats from the people with the long-arms”? Swanson, “no. I couldn’t hear from that far away”. “To your knowledge was anyone harmed at this Protest, Law Enforcement or Protestors”? Swanson said, “no”. “Would you consider this a violent protest”? Agent Swanson said, “absolutely! Yes! These people brought weapons to us! That makes them violent! Next, “if you could have shut down the traffic on the bridge, would you have taken the shot”? Swanson, “yes”! He was going to execute Eric Parker on the bridge that day! And some people wonder how they could have killed LaVoy Finicum! Next, “did any of the BLM use bullhorns to give commands to the Protestors? And, if so, what did they say”? Saying, “they did. They were telling them to disperse, that we had a lawful court order”. Next up, “why is it that some of the exhibits are only for the parties and not for the Jury”? Affirming the fact that the Jury wants access to all the evidence. They don’t want to be left out! An answer was not reported to have been given. Next question, “with your scope could you make out facial features of the people on the bridge”? Agent Swanson told the Jury he could with his 3x’s scope, although the bridge is so far away from his position. Next, “was there someone watching the tan hat while you were looking at black hat”? Swanson answered in the affirmative. A photo was shown earlier that had two women shown who were around ‘black hat’ that were taking photos of him, and then there was a person with a camera that put his fingers in his ears, therefore he knew ‘black hat’ was going to take him out. That spurred this question, “was the woman in the photo the ones you were talking about”? Agent Swanson said, “yes”. Next, “you saw that you saw black hat pointing his weapon, but then later said he did not find out he pointed his gun until he saw the photo. Can you elaborate”? Swanson said, “well, I saw him point it over the barrier, but I didn’t know he was pointing it under the barrier”. “Were you ever in a situation like this before”? “No”. Next, “do you have any training in the role of a sniper”? Swanson, “no”. “You testified that there was radio traffic and they were marking out threats. Who were 'they’”? Agent Swanson told the Jury, “it was people in the truck to the left of me and in front of me”, although this contradicts earlier testimony in which Swanson said he couldn’t really see those people, only through his peripheral. Next question, “when you were ’target ranging’ did you have a spotter”? “Yes. People in the other truck”. Next, “when, and how, was your weapon sighted and dialed in”? He said, “we do that every four months”. Next, “when you were observing black hat was there a haze of a glare”? Responding, “no. It was a clear day and there was no glare”. “Do you feel you were instructed to remove a threat”? Stating, “no. I was just instructed to see them”, yet he testified over and over that he had his gun off safety, slack pulled out, ready to execute Eric Parker! Next question, “at the end of a riffle barrel is a half inch and black, so how were you sure it was pointed at you”? Agent Swanson responding, “well, it was the way it was facing and aiming, and I believe that, even if it wasn’t pointing directly at him, it was pointed at his fellow officers”. Next, “as an officer of the law don’t you realize that pointing your weapon at the public will get a reaction”? Agent Swanson, showing intense frustration, said “well, they brought their weapons! They pointed their weapons first"! Although Swanson told the court he started searching the crowd for threats even before any weapons were pointed. Next, “as an officer with military experience did your imagination take over”? Agent Swanson told the Jury, “no it was not my imagination. I was not tired and my adrenaline kicked in. The lack of sleep did not play a part in the stress and anxiety. It was pure adrenaline and pure concentration”, despite Swanson being up for over 24 hours. The Prosecution did some follow up asking Swanson “if he was down, was he no longer a threat”? This is left hanging in the air by the reporter.
Richard Tanasi asked Agent Scott Swanson, “were you aware that Nevada Highway Patrol was on the bridge”? Answering “yes”, which is just the opposite answer he gave the Jury, but lucky for the Defense because they had Agent Swanson’s previous testimony from last trial and they were going to turn the tables on him!
Todd Leventhal stepped up to question Agent Scott Swanson saying, “you lost tan hat. How long in total were you able to see tan hat? You said you had a magnified scope, and that there was no obstruction.” Leventhal then presents a photo from the bridge looking down into the wash behind the gate showing the court that you can’t even see Agent Swanson’s truck from that point because of the tree obstructing it. The Prosecution objected and there was a lot of arguing back and forth with Judge Navarro finally stepping in saying, “well, it did not obstruct his view of the bridge, but did obstruct his view of the wash”.
Here is a short explanation about how Greg Burleson’s sentencing was adjudicated. So you are convicted of a crime, and there are a set of sentencing guidelines. They assign you a score based on a set of points, based on the offense somewhere from 0 - 42 or 47. Based on that and some of your previous criminal history is a guideline as to where you should be sentenced. However all the Defendants are charged with charges 924c, a weapons violation. The was it’s supposed to work is if you get charged with a crime more than once, you are sentenced more harshly the second time around. However, the department of Justice has wrangled this and charged this in such a way, that if you are convicted of more than one 924c in the same incident, in this case we have the same Greg Burleson, the same riffle, the same Bundy Ranch Protest, the same area, the same agents, the same everything, except they charged him three times with the same crime! They stack those one on top of the other and they must be served consecutively to everything else in the indictment, or that which you are convicted of. So in the case of Greg Burleson each 924c is a seven year sentence. The second one is twenty five, and the third is twenty five. Fifty seven years mandatory minimum, on top of, consecutive of anything else that you are sentenced. He was originally looking at a potential recommendation of about thirty years. The Judge was lenient. She came down ten points which brought it down to 135 months for the other charges, that is how Greg got a 70 year sentence with three 924c charges on top of the other charges.
Also, Todd Engel’s sentencing hearing has been continued until late September. The vindictive behavior of Judge Gloria Navarro was demonstrated as she made her decree from the Judges Chambers without Engel being present for the proceedings where Engel’s current Attorney was dismissed and another Attorney assigned to him. He was not present for the granting of the continuance. Todd Engel is sitting in the Detention Center in Parumph thinking he is going to have his day in court. He has not heard from his new Attorney, he has no idea what is going on behind his back! Engel is looking at serving between 15 - 20 years at sentencing.
We have news for you Special Agent Scott Swanson. If you don’t want to be called a traitor don’t go around putting American Citizens in you scope! Don’t go around harassing people over their land rights, erecting First Amendment Speech Zones! And, Special Agent Scott Swanson. These people brought arms because people were already being tased, thrown to the ground! Attack dogs sicked on them! Ambulances would not come to administer medical treatment to the injured! Dispatch was TOLD not to respond! They brought weapons to keep in non-violent. When you go to a protest unarmed you are subject to be pepper sprayed. To having attack dogs sicked on you and being tasered! If you bring your weapon, people are a lot more civil. Are the people to have no defense? No! They have to be gunned down by itchy finger trigger happy people like you! Courtroom observers that are in Nevada for the first time said they could not tell if the Judge was part of the Prosecution or not. They were very confused by her behavior, they compared it to Guatemala.
July 25, 2017
Today, before the Jury was allowed into the courtroom, Steven Myhre stood to tell the Judge that the Defense had violated the court order signed by Judge Gloria Navarro that forbids the Defense from mentioning the Government overreach as a defense. Myhre is asking the court for sanctions because of the line of questioning Richard Tanasi with Trey Shillie during cross examination. The “sanctions” DOJ Attorney Steven Myhre is asking Judge Navarro to impose is that the Prosecution have the right to read through the Defendants closing statement and have the right to eliminate any language/statements they disagree with. The government continues to eliminate themselves from this case, as far as heavy-handedness and a conspiracy on their part against the Bundy Family. They are essentially taking themselves out to the picture! There is a problem with this though. They are claiming to be the victim in this case, government cannot be a victim, but let’s roll with it for a second. If as a defendant you have a right to confront your accuser, the government. Why can’t you even mention their name or talk about their actions, let’s say, even if they were defending themselves. If they are forbidden from mentioning the government and their action, WHY is there even a court case at all? This is a classic case of “The Emperor Has No Clothes”! This must be a new tactic they are teaching in Law School because I’ve experienced a similar situation. Let me get personal for just one moment. I owned a retail/service oriented business just a few years ago. At times I had to deal with retail thieves. One case went to court, prosecuted by the city in my defense. There were several things I didn’t know about the Prosecutor before hand that I won’t go into here, but when reporting the crime I provided the police with a surveillance video SHOWING THE THEFT! It should have been a slam dunk! Before court I met with the Prosecutor. I asked him if he had the video I provided the city and if he would use it in court that day. He answered in the affirmative. That’s all I cared about. The video would speak for itself! Making a long story short. To my surprise, the Defense Attorney for the thief used the same video I provided in the thief's defense. He fast forwarded the video to a portion past where the crime was recorded to a frame where his client was not even in the frozen frame, basically taking her out of the crime scene, and proclaimed her innocence. The under-qualified Prosecutor didn’t even notice the slight of hand and mounted no rebuttal! The Judge found on behalf of the Defendant, despite my personal testimony on the stand. She walked out of the court “Scott Free”! The Defense Attorney basically removed her from the crime scene and the merchandise, a vanishing act for sure. That is the tactic the Nevada DOJ is using here!
The Jury was brought into the courtroom and cross examination of Shannon Serena began, Todd Leventhal being the first to question him. Leventhal began by trying to clarify what Serena’s statement yesterday of “BDU” meant. Serena said it meant Battle Ready Uniforms. Leventhal presented a photo of the men on the stage to Serena and asked, “is this what you mean and BDU”? Serena indicating “yes”. Leventhal then brought up a portion of the Dash-Cam video in which a truck pulled to the side on I-15 to let Serena pass as he was screaming down the highway at over 100 miles per hour, proving to the Jury that Serena’s testimony that people wouldn’t move out of his way was untrue. Leventhal then brought up Serena's claim the officers were being held at gunpoint. Leventhal proved that the truck who pulled over for him to pass arrived at the bridge AFTER Serena had arrived. This is important because the truck that is spoken of here is the truck the four Defendants were in, PROVING that these Defendants were not holding officers at gunpoint! Leventhal asked Serena if his Dash-Cam was rolling the entire time? Serena said that “he thought it was”, but Officer Madsen’s Dash-Cam has been used in the Prosecutions case. Serena told Leventhal that his Dash-Cam has a mic so, if he were talking to someone voice would be recorded. Todd Leventhal moved to enter into evidence a portion of Serena’s Dash-Cam and is challenged by Judge Navarro. The Prosecution objects stating that Serena’s Dash-Cam only contains video after the Bureau Of Land Management had already left. A side bar ensued and the Judge actually overruled the Prosecution’s objection, but only allowing a one minute segment of Serena’s video to be played. The video is played of a man walking up to Serena and said, “thank you”. Serena walked over to his his NHP vehicle and radios, “everything down here is peaceful. Everyone is happy, all is good”. The Defense rested.
The Prosecution stood for re-cross examination and stated, “of course at that time everyone is good, people with guns got what they wanted! Tensions had already lowered.” Serena’s job was to keep the peace, although his real assignment was to direct traffic. The Prosecution also made the point that a Report is just a “general overview”, so if something doesn’t make it into the report it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Now the portion of the proceedings where Judge Navarro has allowed the Jury to submit their own questions, I bet she’s regretting this. Question one, “do you or anyone controlling traffic ever stop traffic fully”? Serenas answered, “yes, we did stop traffic for one minute to let the crowd cross the road to watch the cattle come home”. Second, “if your hire officers knew that there were officers being held at gunpoint, why did they not send reinforcements”? To this, Serena said, “I was the reinforcement”. Third, “at what time were you informed there were officers being held at gunpoint”? Serena did not know, but sometime after his Dash-Cam turned on back at the Substation. Fourth, “was that statement accurate when you arrived”? Serena testified that “he did not see that when he arrived. My fist task was to get traffic moving again”. Fifth, “did you observe anyone from the wash pointing guns at the bridge”? Serena said, “no”. Sixth, “did you see anyone aiming guns from the wash at the BLM”? Serena, “no”. Seventh, “at anytime were guns on the bridge pointed at you or the other officer’s”? Serena, “no”. Eight, “at any time were people with guns asked about their guns or the purpose or intent in carrying those guns”? Serena said, “tensions were high and I already knew why the people had their guns”. Ninth, “are citizens allowed to open carry in public”? Judge Navarro answered by saying, “this goes to a legal standing, but I can guarantee you, this case is not about that. These Defendants are not merely charged with open carrying in public”! Again, showing her obvious bias, lack of knowledge of the Constitution and acting as fourth Prosecutor in this case. Tenth, “when you initially encountered the men with the long-guns did you assess the situation”? Serena answered, “yes, and my assessment was that they could be in danger at anytime”. Eleven, “did you relay that to the supervisor”? Swerena, “no, I had no comms”. What a crock! What happened since the time he radioed “everyone was happy and all is well”? Twelve, “did you know any other organization that was there that would wear military clothing”? Serena answered, “no” How about the BLM/USFS/NPS and Mercenaries? Thirteen, “was there a plan to clear the unarmed people out of the area that day”? Serena said, “the plan was to release the cattle and the people would leave on their own”. Fourteen, “did you see any of the Defendants holding the BLM at gunpoint”? Serena responding “no”. Fifteen, “were you armed”? Serena, “yes”. Fifteen, “were the men that approached you hostile or aggressive”? Serena, “no, they were stern but not hostile or aggressive. At one time I couldn’t tell the good guys from the bad guys. He felt like saying, ‘can we do shirts vs skins’ so we can tell the good guys from the bad guys”? Sixteen, “did they threaten you in any way”? Serena, “no”. Seventeen, “what did they say to you”? Judge Navarro objected to the question not allowing Serena to answer. Eighteen, “did you see any of the Defendants block the road with a truck”? “No”, said Serena, “but people with guns were blocking traffic”. Nineteen, “if you were responding to people in danger why was your demeanor so clam and laid- back”? Serena’s reply was, “if people treat me with respect, I will treat them with respect. I do this as to not escalate the situation”. Twenty, “you testified about people with assault riffles. What makes a gun an assault riffle”? Serena replied, “the amount of ammo it can hold, and that it can shoot rapidly”. Twenty-one, “is there a prohibition on owning an assault riffle in Nevada”? Judge Navarro objected again saying, “this is not what the trial is about. This is not what they are charged on”. Once again the Jury violating the Judges own “gag order” on mentioning the Second Amendment, let alone the First! Twenty-two, “is it unusual for people to be wearing BDU on Saturday’s in Vegas”? Can I stop and chuckle here? Serena answered the question by saying, “one or two, it’s not unusual, but in mass, like this, it is”. Twenty-three, “you indicated you were fearful. Where is the bias for the fear? Have you ever been in a situation like this”? Serena’s said, “I was afraid I was going to shot and killed”! Directing Traffic? Twenty-four, “have you ever been involved in a civilian volatile situation”? Indicating he had, with no explanation. Twenty-five, “dispatch told you officers were being held at gunpoint. Did they raise the fear level”? Serena elaborated on this question saying how his threat level was fluctuating stating, “we had civilians being stopped at gunpoint who really just wanted out of there”! A total fabrication since, with all the video out in the public domain, there no evidence of this. Heck, Trey Shillie stopped for 30 minutes, and didn’t talk to a single Protestor while he was on scene taking photos! He was back on the road in no time. Twenty-six, “did you inform dispatch that when you arrived on scene it was not as they had described”? Telling the Jury, “no”. Twenty-seven, “who was the Incident Commander”? Serena named Captain Jackson of the Nevada Highway Patrol. Twenty-eight, “your duties changed to support officers being held at gunpoint. Were you checking in on that situation when you got there”? Answering, “no”. Twenty-nine, “did Mr. Serena see any weapons being pointed at the BLM”? “I could see weapons being pointed over the cement barrier”, but he could not see the BLM from his vantage point. Thirty, “you said you responded to a call to assist LEO’s being held at gunpoint”? Serena said "they had superior gunfire and they were in a ‘shock and awe’ situation”. Thirty-one, “have you been trained to deescalate the situation”? Serena responds with the answer to a former question telling them about the “respect factor”, which has nothing to do with deescalation!
Shawn Perez went back for some more cross examination saying to Serena, “from your vantage point you never saw the BLM from the Northbound bridge could you see under the Southbound bridge”? Answering “no”. The Defense rested and the Prosecution called it’s next witness.
Next up for the Prosecution was Ranger Alexandra Burke who testified that she saw Ricky Lovelien and Todd Engel point weapons at her. She told the court that she took pictures of that with her phone through a pair of binoculars. Courtroom observers witnessed Burke’s photos and said they don’t show the men pointing weapons of any type, they just show people on the bridge. Burke also testified that she saw Eric Parker point weapons at her. Burke’s position was at Post-1 between the gate and under the Southbound bridge. Burke’s photos were taken from a long distance away from the bridge. She even testified she did not have enough fire power to shoot from her position. Burke also testified she did not have “long range weapon expertise”. Burke not applying commonsense in this situation that, the weapons the men had were not long range either. In her constant tearful state she testified she “took cover” at this position, although she deals with people with weapons on a daily basis. Burke testified that she saw Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien there before the Nevada Highway Patrol arrived, but we know from Shannon Serena’s testimony in cross examination that is not so. Alexandra Burke was asked by the Prosecution, “what was the threat”? Burke answered, “guys with guns”. Just the fact that they had guns drove her to over exaggerate the threat! It skewed her vision of the men on the bridge! I think the governments screening process for potential officers is flawed. Burke, when pressed to tell why she was so fearful said, Engel and Lovelien had weapons in the “low ready” position, meaning lowered. And, Parker had his weapon at the “high ready” position, meaning raised.
Court reconvenes with Ranger Alexandra Burke resumed her place on the stand testifying of her actions as assigned to the wash and the bridge, since she migrated between the two. Her main focus was on Eric Parker, Todd, Engel and Ricky Lovelien through her binoculars where she took photos with her phone. Ranger Burke insists Engel and Lovelien were working together, claiming they pointed weapons at her. Ranger Burke also claimed that “black hat man” and someone else near him were working together also, but was unsure if they had weapons. Ranger Burke said she was informed they were mimicking each other, although this drew objection because it is considered third party information. I’d like to know who was putting these thoughts into her head? She was definitely a tool of whomever was directing the government on scene. Ranger Burke stating “she was concerned because she could not shoot back”. Well, why don’t you take cover instead of running from the road to the wash taking photos! Burke did admit that the only thing that kept her from firing at these men was that, “innocent people could be shot with her gunfire”. During Burke’s testimony, she is once again, emotional to tears, but quickly moves back to a harsh bitterness. At this point a video from Ranger Burke’s phone was entered into evidence. This video depicted a BLM vehicle exiting the property after they were told to back down. One thins was clear, even from the BLM’s vantage point behind this camera, there were no weapons pointed at them as was testimony in the previous trial. Burke claimed she was “in an active shooter experience” where she said she shot the person. Burke testified that the event at the wash was actually worse that the active shooter experience. Burke admitted that she preferred the active shooter experience because she was actually able to act on her training to shoot, and this experience individuals were approaching her. A fore-drawn conclusion being you’d rather shoot an individual rather than have a conversation with them! The fact is there were no shots fired in this Protest, no one hurt or injured on April 12, 2014 except for the governments ego.
Ranger Burke is then cross examined. Courtroom observers are reporting that Ranger Burke claims not to have any sense of time during the incident. The whole day is a blur to her. Burke in noncommittal to any answers to questions being asked by the Defense Attorneys. Burke refused to give answers of any substance during cross examination. The Defense was successful at getting her to say that people were shouting obscenities at her. "Sticks and stones”. There were "men with guns”. Ranger Burke was asked by the Defense if she noticed the Nevada Highway Patrol on scene when she was so obsessed with Parker, Engel and Lovelien. Burke told the court that she did not see them at the scene, while later re-phrasing her answer to “I didn’t notice them”. The Defense showed video from Nevada Highway Patrol cameras on scene where the officers were shown wearing bright green vests directing traffic with their vehicles near by. During Burke’s testimony she revealed that while operations were called off on April 11, 2014 she remained on scene throughout the night where she tried to get some sleep, but was unable to because she slept with her earpiece in where there was much radio traffic. Burke disclosed she met with the US Attorney’s Office and the the FBI concurrently 3 times.
Jess Marchese questioned Ranger Burke on her mode of transportation from one point to another, and who were the people around her during this time. This was immediately objected to which brings about a side bar. Marchese continued by asking Burke to identify her position on the video. It was said that Burke had trouble marking the spot because the video was not stopped at the time-stamp she had been coached to mark during her meetings with the DOJ/FBI. Burke finally said, “wait. I am confused”? The Prosecution then stood to object because the Defense was not using the same time-stamp they had coached the witness to use. The Prosecution insist the video be moved back 13 seconds. When the video was moved to the previous point the government requested, Burke was able to now place her mark on the screen, although it was still placed inappropriately on a spot, not an individual, proving the point she was coached by the government to depict their narrative. During further questioning Burke testified that she was “black hat man” in the crowd at a “high ready”, meaning the man had his gun up ready to fire up by his nose. The Defense asked her about what time? Burke told the court about 20 seconds and then he went out of view. Many questions were asked Burke in identifying these men as to clothing, patches, facial hair, body armor and hats. At this time during questioning the Prosecution side of the room begins a “stare-down” on the observers in the courtroom trying to intimidate them
The Jury questions began with, “at anytime while you were on the scene did these men say anything to you or your Rangers”? Burke telling the Jury ’they’ shouted obscenities at her like “F-** Off. Get the Hell out of here”. Next question, “did you hear anyone on the ground say anything to you”? Which she answered in the first question leaving everyone to conclude that in the first question, “the men” were to far away for her to have heard a single word from their mouths. Next question, “do Rangers have body armor”? Burke, “yes”. “Do you carry any type of armor”? Ranger Burke turned on the waterworks telling the Jury AFTER the event they were issued BETTER body armor, saying that the rounds would have gone threw the old armor. Next, “do you carry more powerful arms in your vehicles”? Burke told the Jury she had an AR-15, an 870 Shotgun. Judge Navarro then butted in, asking her own question, “where you wearing your body armor”? To which Burke answered “yes”. Next question, “when you saw weapons pointed at you, did you report it to dispatch”? Burke said, “no”. Burke was then asked, “why didn’t you fill out your report on the same day”? To which Burke responded.”I was in a stressful situation. I had to escape, even when I got back to my hotel room, I was still not safe. This went on for three days! Even when I filled out my report, although not a full report three days later, I was still shaken up”! Next, “being in the lower ‘low wash’ looking up at the North Highway, the position of the guns pointing down, did the look in the low-ready position”? Observers were confused by this Q & A because Burke was not in the ‘low low wash” but answered that “yes, the guns looked in low-ready position”, continuing that she could see ‘black hat’ also pointing at her fellow officers. This should have been objected to by the Defense because Burke cannot testify as a third part witness. Burke was then asked, “could you see the finger on the trigger”? Burke said, “no, I was too far away” but was assured it was there. Multiple photos were blown up and showed during testimony and it was proved there were not fingers on the triggers. Next question, “what is the difference between camo here and camo on a regular day”? Burke tells the jury that she runs into people on a daily basis who wear camo, but the difference is that hunters wear camo to hunt and these people were wearing camo to hide. Umm? Camo is used to hide by hunters FROM THE ANIMALS! Burke was asked, “who do you think the incident commander was”? Burke turned to the Judge and asked, “my incident commander or ’the’ incident commander”? Judge Navarro responded “your incident commander”. Burke told the Jury Ranger Johnson, but he had to go so ultimately Don Miller. Next question, “were you in regular communication with the incident commander”? Burke said, “yes, but I had to leave my position to go speak with him”. Well! What happened to that radio that kept you awake the night before? The Jury than asked, “were you told Nevada Highway Patrol was in the area”? Burke, “I could not remember”. “Were you aware when you observed the men with long-guns Metro was there to support the BLM”? Burke, “yes”. Next, “when you saw ‘black hat’ scanning the crowd, could he have been using his scope as binocs”? Burke said, “it’s a possibility but being an instructor of Hunter Safety you should ABSOLUTELY NEVER use your scope as binocs because you do not point your weapon at something you are not ready to shoot at”. “Did the three guys with guns have scopes on their weapons”? Burke saying, “I could not see that, but all I could see was the barrel of the gun pointed at me”. Next, “with your training in long-guns and scopes, would it be difficult for you to make the shot knowing you were the target”? Burke told the Jury she couldn’t have made the shot because there were so many people around. Judge Navarro again interrupts and says, “if you were the target”. Burke continued, “it doesn’t matter if they could have hit me, they could have hit another officer around me so, they could make the shot, but it would have been impossible for me”. “How many women and children were in the wash”? Burke stating she could not give a accurate number, but one was too many. “How did you and your colleges calm down the crowd what was screaming”? Ranger Burke said, “I don’t know that we did, we just disengaged”. Proving the fact that the government operation was not focused on deescalating the situation but escalating the situation with their actions. Next question, “you mentioned two men were pointing weapons at your position, what did you do”. Burke, “I ducked”! Last question, “why did you move so close to take photos if you were so scared”? Ranger Burke stated that there were two officers behind a light pole covering her, so she felt safe about doing that. This concluded Ranger Burke’s testimony.
The Government now called Officer Shawn Cox from Washington who works for the US Park Police. Officer Cox performed security of the Incident Command Post (IPC). Officer Cox was supposed to be on the transport team providing security for the cattle transport. Cox is assigned and trained to deal with large groups with a focus on non-violent groups in reference to they weapons and ammunition such as, shields, pepper balls to be deployed against groups who throw bottles or rocks, but not weapons. Officer Cox testified that he did not see anything threatening in nature People where shouting at them, but he perceived a threat because Protestors could have thrown something from the Southbound bridge. Officer Cox said they did not want to make any contact, but just keep them out. This is why they put up the gate. They were not going to talk to the Protestors, they just wanted them to stay out. Cox testified to men on the Northbound bridge with weapons.
Richard Tanasi was first to cross examine Officer Shawn Cox. Tanasi said that you singled these men out because they had weapons, they had the high ground and the had vests, NOT their actions, but because of how they were dressed. Proving the fact that we are being profiled and charged on thought crime, what they THINK you might do, not your actual actions. Remember, there were no shots fired, no violence, no injuries on April 12, 2014. Tanasi brought up the fact that Gold Butte was going to be reopened. Officer Cox told the court that he didn’t know what he had been told. He hadn’t heard about the re-opening, he was just there to transport the cattle. Which feeds in to the fact that the government constantly used plausible deniability in their operations to justify their actions and get off scot-free if caught! So, is Cox lying or just incompetent?
Todd Leventhal was next up. He talked about the two vulnerable areas being the I-15 and the wash, and how these two areas were picked out by the government before anyone got there. Leventhal also brought forth testimony about the gear the Park Police brought with them, the long=guns, riffles, less than lethal force weapons, pepper balls, tasers, helmets, shirts, vests, visors, goggles etc. A photo is produced that show this “set team” decked out for war. They are dressed in green, head to toe. You can’t even see their faces, only their eyes. Resembling Mercenaries. It begs the question, do you send out Mercenaries to deal with crowd control? And what does this say to the public? Government decked out in full military gear, you can’t even see their faces, and we are not to be alarmed? This would only escalate any situation. They are depicted as being ready for battle not to deescalate a situation.
Some thoughts about today’s proceedings. The government is charging these men with thought crime, and the government is the judge of what amounts to a though crime. The government cannot be a victim. No Victim. No Crime! The government can round you up two years after the fact and bring a bunch of crybaby LEO’s to testify against you and tell how scared they were. The Prosecution consists of 10 individuals 4 Attorneys, FBI, Court Personnel and the Judge herself. The Defense, 4 Attorneys. Odds- 10 to 4. Everyone takes “an oath” before taking the stand to “tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth” but the truth is being prevented from being told in the courtroom. There is SOME truth, but not the whole truth, because it’s been censored by the government.
The Jury was brought into the courtroom and cross examination of Shannon Serena began, Todd Leventhal being the first to question him. Leventhal began by trying to clarify what Serena’s statement yesterday of “BDU” meant. Serena said it meant Battle Ready Uniforms. Leventhal presented a photo of the men on the stage to Serena and asked, “is this what you mean and BDU”? Serena indicating “yes”. Leventhal then brought up a portion of the Dash-Cam video in which a truck pulled to the side on I-15 to let Serena pass as he was screaming down the highway at over 100 miles per hour, proving to the Jury that Serena’s testimony that people wouldn’t move out of his way was untrue. Leventhal then brought up Serena's claim the officers were being held at gunpoint. Leventhal proved that the truck who pulled over for him to pass arrived at the bridge AFTER Serena had arrived. This is important because the truck that is spoken of here is the truck the four Defendants were in, PROVING that these Defendants were not holding officers at gunpoint! Leventhal asked Serena if his Dash-Cam was rolling the entire time? Serena said that “he thought it was”, but Officer Madsen’s Dash-Cam has been used in the Prosecutions case. Serena told Leventhal that his Dash-Cam has a mic so, if he were talking to someone voice would be recorded. Todd Leventhal moved to enter into evidence a portion of Serena’s Dash-Cam and is challenged by Judge Navarro. The Prosecution objects stating that Serena’s Dash-Cam only contains video after the Bureau Of Land Management had already left. A side bar ensued and the Judge actually overruled the Prosecution’s objection, but only allowing a one minute segment of Serena’s video to be played. The video is played of a man walking up to Serena and said, “thank you”. Serena walked over to his his NHP vehicle and radios, “everything down here is peaceful. Everyone is happy, all is good”. The Defense rested.
The Prosecution stood for re-cross examination and stated, “of course at that time everyone is good, people with guns got what they wanted! Tensions had already lowered.” Serena’s job was to keep the peace, although his real assignment was to direct traffic. The Prosecution also made the point that a Report is just a “general overview”, so if something doesn’t make it into the report it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
Now the portion of the proceedings where Judge Navarro has allowed the Jury to submit their own questions, I bet she’s regretting this. Question one, “do you or anyone controlling traffic ever stop traffic fully”? Serenas answered, “yes, we did stop traffic for one minute to let the crowd cross the road to watch the cattle come home”. Second, “if your hire officers knew that there were officers being held at gunpoint, why did they not send reinforcements”? To this, Serena said, “I was the reinforcement”. Third, “at what time were you informed there were officers being held at gunpoint”? Serena did not know, but sometime after his Dash-Cam turned on back at the Substation. Fourth, “was that statement accurate when you arrived”? Serena testified that “he did not see that when he arrived. My fist task was to get traffic moving again”. Fifth, “did you observe anyone from the wash pointing guns at the bridge”? Serena said, “no”. Sixth, “did you see anyone aiming guns from the wash at the BLM”? Serena, “no”. Seventh, “at anytime were guns on the bridge pointed at you or the other officer’s”? Serena, “no”. Eight, “at any time were people with guns asked about their guns or the purpose or intent in carrying those guns”? Serena said, “tensions were high and I already knew why the people had their guns”. Ninth, “are citizens allowed to open carry in public”? Judge Navarro answered by saying, “this goes to a legal standing, but I can guarantee you, this case is not about that. These Defendants are not merely charged with open carrying in public”! Again, showing her obvious bias, lack of knowledge of the Constitution and acting as fourth Prosecutor in this case. Tenth, “when you initially encountered the men with the long-guns did you assess the situation”? Serena answered, “yes, and my assessment was that they could be in danger at anytime”. Eleven, “did you relay that to the supervisor”? Swerena, “no, I had no comms”. What a crock! What happened since the time he radioed “everyone was happy and all is well”? Twelve, “did you know any other organization that was there that would wear military clothing”? Serena answered, “no” How about the BLM/USFS/NPS and Mercenaries? Thirteen, “was there a plan to clear the unarmed people out of the area that day”? Serena said, “the plan was to release the cattle and the people would leave on their own”. Fourteen, “did you see any of the Defendants holding the BLM at gunpoint”? Serena responding “no”. Fifteen, “were you armed”? Serena, “yes”. Fifteen, “were the men that approached you hostile or aggressive”? Serena, “no, they were stern but not hostile or aggressive. At one time I couldn’t tell the good guys from the bad guys. He felt like saying, ‘can we do shirts vs skins’ so we can tell the good guys from the bad guys”? Sixteen, “did they threaten you in any way”? Serena, “no”. Seventeen, “what did they say to you”? Judge Navarro objected to the question not allowing Serena to answer. Eighteen, “did you see any of the Defendants block the road with a truck”? “No”, said Serena, “but people with guns were blocking traffic”. Nineteen, “if you were responding to people in danger why was your demeanor so clam and laid- back”? Serena’s reply was, “if people treat me with respect, I will treat them with respect. I do this as to not escalate the situation”. Twenty, “you testified about people with assault riffles. What makes a gun an assault riffle”? Serena replied, “the amount of ammo it can hold, and that it can shoot rapidly”. Twenty-one, “is there a prohibition on owning an assault riffle in Nevada”? Judge Navarro objected again saying, “this is not what the trial is about. This is not what they are charged on”. Once again the Jury violating the Judges own “gag order” on mentioning the Second Amendment, let alone the First! Twenty-two, “is it unusual for people to be wearing BDU on Saturday’s in Vegas”? Can I stop and chuckle here? Serena answered the question by saying, “one or two, it’s not unusual, but in mass, like this, it is”. Twenty-three, “you indicated you were fearful. Where is the bias for the fear? Have you ever been in a situation like this”? Serena’s said, “I was afraid I was going to shot and killed”! Directing Traffic? Twenty-four, “have you ever been involved in a civilian volatile situation”? Indicating he had, with no explanation. Twenty-five, “dispatch told you officers were being held at gunpoint. Did they raise the fear level”? Serena elaborated on this question saying how his threat level was fluctuating stating, “we had civilians being stopped at gunpoint who really just wanted out of there”! A total fabrication since, with all the video out in the public domain, there no evidence of this. Heck, Trey Shillie stopped for 30 minutes, and didn’t talk to a single Protestor while he was on scene taking photos! He was back on the road in no time. Twenty-six, “did you inform dispatch that when you arrived on scene it was not as they had described”? Telling the Jury, “no”. Twenty-seven, “who was the Incident Commander”? Serena named Captain Jackson of the Nevada Highway Patrol. Twenty-eight, “your duties changed to support officers being held at gunpoint. Were you checking in on that situation when you got there”? Answering, “no”. Twenty-nine, “did Mr. Serena see any weapons being pointed at the BLM”? “I could see weapons being pointed over the cement barrier”, but he could not see the BLM from his vantage point. Thirty, “you said you responded to a call to assist LEO’s being held at gunpoint”? Serena said "they had superior gunfire and they were in a ‘shock and awe’ situation”. Thirty-one, “have you been trained to deescalate the situation”? Serena responds with the answer to a former question telling them about the “respect factor”, which has nothing to do with deescalation!
Shawn Perez went back for some more cross examination saying to Serena, “from your vantage point you never saw the BLM from the Northbound bridge could you see under the Southbound bridge”? Answering “no”. The Defense rested and the Prosecution called it’s next witness.
Next up for the Prosecution was Ranger Alexandra Burke who testified that she saw Ricky Lovelien and Todd Engel point weapons at her. She told the court that she took pictures of that with her phone through a pair of binoculars. Courtroom observers witnessed Burke’s photos and said they don’t show the men pointing weapons of any type, they just show people on the bridge. Burke also testified that she saw Eric Parker point weapons at her. Burke’s position was at Post-1 between the gate and under the Southbound bridge. Burke’s photos were taken from a long distance away from the bridge. She even testified she did not have enough fire power to shoot from her position. Burke also testified she did not have “long range weapon expertise”. Burke not applying commonsense in this situation that, the weapons the men had were not long range either. In her constant tearful state she testified she “took cover” at this position, although she deals with people with weapons on a daily basis. Burke testified that she saw Todd Engel and Ricky Lovelien there before the Nevada Highway Patrol arrived, but we know from Shannon Serena’s testimony in cross examination that is not so. Alexandra Burke was asked by the Prosecution, “what was the threat”? Burke answered, “guys with guns”. Just the fact that they had guns drove her to over exaggerate the threat! It skewed her vision of the men on the bridge! I think the governments screening process for potential officers is flawed. Burke, when pressed to tell why she was so fearful said, Engel and Lovelien had weapons in the “low ready” position, meaning lowered. And, Parker had his weapon at the “high ready” position, meaning raised.
 |
| Alexandra Burke Ranger for Bureau Of Land Management Ranger |
Court reconvenes with Ranger Alexandra Burke resumed her place on the stand testifying of her actions as assigned to the wash and the bridge, since she migrated between the two. Her main focus was on Eric Parker, Todd, Engel and Ricky Lovelien through her binoculars where she took photos with her phone. Ranger Burke insists Engel and Lovelien were working together, claiming they pointed weapons at her. Ranger Burke also claimed that “black hat man” and someone else near him were working together also, but was unsure if they had weapons. Ranger Burke said she was informed they were mimicking each other, although this drew objection because it is considered third party information. I’d like to know who was putting these thoughts into her head? She was definitely a tool of whomever was directing the government on scene. Ranger Burke stating “she was concerned because she could not shoot back”. Well, why don’t you take cover instead of running from the road to the wash taking photos! Burke did admit that the only thing that kept her from firing at these men was that, “innocent people could be shot with her gunfire”. During Burke’s testimony, she is once again, emotional to tears, but quickly moves back to a harsh bitterness. At this point a video from Ranger Burke’s phone was entered into evidence. This video depicted a BLM vehicle exiting the property after they were told to back down. One thins was clear, even from the BLM’s vantage point behind this camera, there were no weapons pointed at them as was testimony in the previous trial. Burke claimed she was “in an active shooter experience” where she said she shot the person. Burke testified that the event at the wash was actually worse that the active shooter experience. Burke admitted that she preferred the active shooter experience because she was actually able to act on her training to shoot, and this experience individuals were approaching her. A fore-drawn conclusion being you’d rather shoot an individual rather than have a conversation with them! The fact is there were no shots fired in this Protest, no one hurt or injured on April 12, 2014 except for the governments ego.
Ranger Burke is then cross examined. Courtroom observers are reporting that Ranger Burke claims not to have any sense of time during the incident. The whole day is a blur to her. Burke in noncommittal to any answers to questions being asked by the Defense Attorneys. Burke refused to give answers of any substance during cross examination. The Defense was successful at getting her to say that people were shouting obscenities at her. "Sticks and stones”. There were "men with guns”. Ranger Burke was asked by the Defense if she noticed the Nevada Highway Patrol on scene when she was so obsessed with Parker, Engel and Lovelien. Burke told the court that she did not see them at the scene, while later re-phrasing her answer to “I didn’t notice them”. The Defense showed video from Nevada Highway Patrol cameras on scene where the officers were shown wearing bright green vests directing traffic with their vehicles near by. During Burke’s testimony she revealed that while operations were called off on April 11, 2014 she remained on scene throughout the night where she tried to get some sleep, but was unable to because she slept with her earpiece in where there was much radio traffic. Burke disclosed she met with the US Attorney’s Office and the the FBI concurrently 3 times.
Jess Marchese questioned Ranger Burke on her mode of transportation from one point to another, and who were the people around her during this time. This was immediately objected to which brings about a side bar. Marchese continued by asking Burke to identify her position on the video. It was said that Burke had trouble marking the spot because the video was not stopped at the time-stamp she had been coached to mark during her meetings with the DOJ/FBI. Burke finally said, “wait. I am confused”? The Prosecution then stood to object because the Defense was not using the same time-stamp they had coached the witness to use. The Prosecution insist the video be moved back 13 seconds. When the video was moved to the previous point the government requested, Burke was able to now place her mark on the screen, although it was still placed inappropriately on a spot, not an individual, proving the point she was coached by the government to depict their narrative. During further questioning Burke testified that she was “black hat man” in the crowd at a “high ready”, meaning the man had his gun up ready to fire up by his nose. The Defense asked her about what time? Burke told the court about 20 seconds and then he went out of view. Many questions were asked Burke in identifying these men as to clothing, patches, facial hair, body armor and hats. At this time during questioning the Prosecution side of the room begins a “stare-down” on the observers in the courtroom trying to intimidate them
The Jury questions began with, “at anytime while you were on the scene did these men say anything to you or your Rangers”? Burke telling the Jury ’they’ shouted obscenities at her like “F-** Off. Get the Hell out of here”. Next question, “did you hear anyone on the ground say anything to you”? Which she answered in the first question leaving everyone to conclude that in the first question, “the men” were to far away for her to have heard a single word from their mouths. Next question, “do Rangers have body armor”? Burke, “yes”. “Do you carry any type of armor”? Ranger Burke turned on the waterworks telling the Jury AFTER the event they were issued BETTER body armor, saying that the rounds would have gone threw the old armor. Next, “do you carry more powerful arms in your vehicles”? Burke told the Jury she had an AR-15, an 870 Shotgun. Judge Navarro then butted in, asking her own question, “where you wearing your body armor”? To which Burke answered “yes”. Next question, “when you saw weapons pointed at you, did you report it to dispatch”? Burke said, “no”. Burke was then asked, “why didn’t you fill out your report on the same day”? To which Burke responded.”I was in a stressful situation. I had to escape, even when I got back to my hotel room, I was still not safe. This went on for three days! Even when I filled out my report, although not a full report three days later, I was still shaken up”! Next, “being in the lower ‘low wash’ looking up at the North Highway, the position of the guns pointing down, did the look in the low-ready position”? Observers were confused by this Q & A because Burke was not in the ‘low low wash” but answered that “yes, the guns looked in low-ready position”, continuing that she could see ‘black hat’ also pointing at her fellow officers. This should have been objected to by the Defense because Burke cannot testify as a third part witness. Burke was then asked, “could you see the finger on the trigger”? Burke said, “no, I was too far away” but was assured it was there. Multiple photos were blown up and showed during testimony and it was proved there were not fingers on the triggers. Next question, “what is the difference between camo here and camo on a regular day”? Burke tells the jury that she runs into people on a daily basis who wear camo, but the difference is that hunters wear camo to hunt and these people were wearing camo to hide. Umm? Camo is used to hide by hunters FROM THE ANIMALS! Burke was asked, “who do you think the incident commander was”? Burke turned to the Judge and asked, “my incident commander or ’the’ incident commander”? Judge Navarro responded “your incident commander”. Burke told the Jury Ranger Johnson, but he had to go so ultimately Don Miller. Next question, “were you in regular communication with the incident commander”? Burke said, “yes, but I had to leave my position to go speak with him”. Well! What happened to that radio that kept you awake the night before? The Jury than asked, “were you told Nevada Highway Patrol was in the area”? Burke, “I could not remember”. “Were you aware when you observed the men with long-guns Metro was there to support the BLM”? Burke, “yes”. Next, “when you saw ‘black hat’ scanning the crowd, could he have been using his scope as binocs”? Burke said, “it’s a possibility but being an instructor of Hunter Safety you should ABSOLUTELY NEVER use your scope as binocs because you do not point your weapon at something you are not ready to shoot at”. “Did the three guys with guns have scopes on their weapons”? Burke saying, “I could not see that, but all I could see was the barrel of the gun pointed at me”. Next, “with your training in long-guns and scopes, would it be difficult for you to make the shot knowing you were the target”? Burke told the Jury she couldn’t have made the shot because there were so many people around. Judge Navarro again interrupts and says, “if you were the target”. Burke continued, “it doesn’t matter if they could have hit me, they could have hit another officer around me so, they could make the shot, but it would have been impossible for me”. “How many women and children were in the wash”? Burke stating she could not give a accurate number, but one was too many. “How did you and your colleges calm down the crowd what was screaming”? Ranger Burke said, “I don’t know that we did, we just disengaged”. Proving the fact that the government operation was not focused on deescalating the situation but escalating the situation with their actions. Next question, “you mentioned two men were pointing weapons at your position, what did you do”. Burke, “I ducked”! Last question, “why did you move so close to take photos if you were so scared”? Ranger Burke stated that there were two officers behind a light pole covering her, so she felt safe about doing that. This concluded Ranger Burke’s testimony.
The Government now called Officer Shawn Cox from Washington who works for the US Park Police. Officer Cox performed security of the Incident Command Post (IPC). Officer Cox was supposed to be on the transport team providing security for the cattle transport. Cox is assigned and trained to deal with large groups with a focus on non-violent groups in reference to they weapons and ammunition such as, shields, pepper balls to be deployed against groups who throw bottles or rocks, but not weapons. Officer Cox testified that he did not see anything threatening in nature People where shouting at them, but he perceived a threat because Protestors could have thrown something from the Southbound bridge. Officer Cox said they did not want to make any contact, but just keep them out. This is why they put up the gate. They were not going to talk to the Protestors, they just wanted them to stay out. Cox testified to men on the Northbound bridge with weapons.
Richard Tanasi was first to cross examine Officer Shawn Cox. Tanasi said that you singled these men out because they had weapons, they had the high ground and the had vests, NOT their actions, but because of how they were dressed. Proving the fact that we are being profiled and charged on thought crime, what they THINK you might do, not your actual actions. Remember, there were no shots fired, no violence, no injuries on April 12, 2014. Tanasi brought up the fact that Gold Butte was going to be reopened. Officer Cox told the court that he didn’t know what he had been told. He hadn’t heard about the re-opening, he was just there to transport the cattle. Which feeds in to the fact that the government constantly used plausible deniability in their operations to justify their actions and get off scot-free if caught! So, is Cox lying or just incompetent?
Todd Leventhal was next up. He talked about the two vulnerable areas being the I-15 and the wash, and how these two areas were picked out by the government before anyone got there. Leventhal also brought forth testimony about the gear the Park Police brought with them, the long=guns, riffles, less than lethal force weapons, pepper balls, tasers, helmets, shirts, vests, visors, goggles etc. A photo is produced that show this “set team” decked out for war. They are dressed in green, head to toe. You can’t even see their faces, only their eyes. Resembling Mercenaries. It begs the question, do you send out Mercenaries to deal with crowd control? And what does this say to the public? Government decked out in full military gear, you can’t even see their faces, and we are not to be alarmed? This would only escalate any situation. They are depicted as being ready for battle not to deescalate a situation.
Some thoughts about today’s proceedings. The government is charging these men with thought crime, and the government is the judge of what amounts to a though crime. The government cannot be a victim. No Victim. No Crime! The government can round you up two years after the fact and bring a bunch of crybaby LEO’s to testify against you and tell how scared they were. The Prosecution consists of 10 individuals 4 Attorneys, FBI, Court Personnel and the Judge herself. The Defense, 4 Attorneys. Odds- 10 to 4. Everyone takes “an oath” before taking the stand to “tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth” but the truth is being prevented from being told in the courtroom. There is SOME truth, but not the whole truth, because it’s been censored by the government.
July 24, 2017
Today’s court session began with Jury questions. “You said you saw an individual prone and crouched and in the crouched position, did you message that to the ground and have people look into it”? McEwen told the Jury, “no, I did not see it at the time I was taking the video”. Next, “why did you not have a relief aircraft for when you went to refuel”? McEwen answered, “the leadership above advised that only one aircraft was needed when he was told to deploy”. Next question, “is it known that the Defendants were just on the ground or on the bridges”? McEwen told the Jury “he could not determine that”. The Jury then asked, “if on the bridge could the Bureau Of Land Management see them from their position”? Judge Gloria Navarro would not let the witness answer the question.
Richard Tanasi was the first to re-cross examine Earl J. McEwen on the stand. He was the video camera operator in the Cessna that flew 12,000 feet over Bunkerville on April 14, 2014 capturing footage of the scene that resembled an ant farm. McEwen testified that he saw people ‘prone on the bride’ when courtroom observers say you couldn’t see anything in detail at that distance. Tanasi began his questioning with, “when did you find out that they were in the prone and crouching position”? McEwen testified that “when reviewing the tape for this trial is when I found out”, not the previous trial held months ago. Tanasi then asked who was at the meeting where he disclosed this information? Stating, “there were many people among them the Prosecution”. Tanasi asked McEwen, “was the FBI there”? He responded “yes”. That concluded the re-cross examination of McEwen.
Alex Ellis has apparently recovered from his medical condition that kept him out of court last week. He was on the stand for cross examination. Before questioning Richard Tanasi made a motion on circumstantial evidence. Tanasi said the government opened the door on circumstantial evidence when the Prosecution had asked Ellis what he thought the mood of the crown was at the first rally at the stage on April 12, 2014, while testifying for the Prosecution last week. The Jury was dismissed for a discussion among all parties with Tanasi saying, “I would like to ask other questions about the 'state of mind' during the trial since the government has been allowed to do so with their witnesses". Tanasi presented case law to substantiate his motion, but Judge Navarro said, “you don’t have any case law of a case where it says the Defense can rely on circumstantial evidence because they cannot call a Defendant to testify. The Prosecution can do this but, the Defense cannot because it opens the Defendant up to cross examination”. The discussion went on for some time with Steven Myhre standing to say, “just because we did this one time does not open the door of unlimited opportunity”. Tanasi argued that it was “the mood of the crowd” that was attested to”. And Myhre said, “well, it still doesn’t open the door to everything”. To which the Judge said, “I have made my ruling, pull in the Jury, I am through hearing from you”. With the Jury seated again the Judge reads another Jury question, “if we don’t understand a word, can we stop and ‘Google it’ up”? The Judge told the Jury, “no, you have to write it down and ask the question and we will provide an answer”.
Richard Tanasi then went into cross examination of Alex Ellis who traveled to Bunkerville with, now deceased, Michael Flynn. Both from Utah, working with The Independent News outlet. With video camera in hand they went about the crowd asking inflammatory question to the Protestors. Many times separated from each other having their own experiences. Ellis is a Prosecution witness testifying to the film footage of Flynn, but was not personally present when Flynn did his filming. The Defense has been in opposition to this testimony because it is not a personal eyewitness account. It is hearsay at least and speculation at worst. Tanasi spent some time questioning Ellis about his position on the bridge and in the wash during the tense moments on April 12, 2014. Tanasi presented a photo of the Nevada State Highway Patrol truck. This was immediately objected to. The Prosecution stating this witness cannot identify trucks! There was questioning by the Judge asking, “are you just trying to identify what is in the video, or are you asking what he is seeing when he was there”? Ellis is allowed to answer the question with, “I do not recall”. Coached well by the Prosecution while suffering his emergency medical condition several days ago. Ellis disclosed that prior to his testimony last week he met with the US Attorneys three times and the FBI twice.
Jess Marchese was next to cross examine the witness saying, “on April 12, 2014 you went to Bunkerville, in your video you identified Eric Parker. You said you saw him previously at the stage. You said he had a weapon, but later you go in and they show you the photos and you didn’t actually have a weapon, he was unarmed”. Asking, “what made him stick out”? Alex Ellis said, “he was wearing a chest rig with magazines”. Marchese said, “others were wearing chest rigs”. Ellis responded, “yes, but others were wearing camo and you could tell they were part of a group. This man was alone”. Ellis was then asked about the event at the stage where Gillespie announced that the Bureau Of Land Management was ceasing operations and Gold Butte was being re-opened. Asking Ellis, “do you know where Gold Butte is”? Ellis did not know. Marchese continued, “lots of people were there. Did you see Eric Parker when you arrived at the parking spot”? Responding “no”. Then Marchese said, “most people were going to the Northbound bridge and you joined them. Where they walking or running”? Ellis responded, “it was kind of a mixture”. Next Marchese asked Ellis “when you were down at the wash did you alternate putting your back to the Northbound bridge and the Southbound bridge”? He answered, “yes”. The Judge at this time interrupts with her own question, “when you and Flynn are separated are you watching Flynn”? This is seen as a defense tactic because she can see the Defense making headway proving to the Jury that Ellis and Flynn were separated many times during Flynn’s filming his video, and thereby, his testimony should be impeached as only opinion by Ellis.
Todd Leventhal was up next to question Ellis saying, “you drove with Flynn in his car with Utah plates. Why did you go”? This drew objection from the Prosecution sighting that it was bias. A side bar was called and in the end, Judge Navarro sustained the objection. Leventhal proceeded to ask Ellis about cameras in the video footage, and asked, “did you see Mr. Drexler when you were at the rally”? Ellis stating, “yes I did. I could tell because he was wearing a chest plate with magazines”. Ellis is asked to circle Scott Drexler on a photo. Ellis circles Eric Parker in stead. Ellis during further questioning realized he had circled the wrong person and said, “I got that confused”. He erased his circle and circled Steven Stewart this time as Drexler. The Judge then interrupts with her own question, “do you know this man by first name”? Ellis answering “no”. There was an objection to using Ellis to identify people. It was sustained and Leventhal continued asking Ellis questions. “When did you come to know the names of these people”? Ellis’ answer, “after I visited with the government”. There was a lot of going through the videos and identifying hats, cameras, flags, and lots of camo, everything except for guns. Leventhal presented video footage of the BLM asking, “did you see these men from the Northbound bridge”? Ellis answering, “yes I did”. “Did you see them pointing weapons”? He said, “no, I could not make that out from where I was standing”. Leventhal then asked if the videos were in sequential order? The reporter failed to give an answer. Ellis was then asked, “in this video Flynn asked you to take a note, asking you to see if you could hear what the BLM was saying. How did you answer that”? Ellis said, “they were on a megaphone and it was hard to hear them because the crowd was being loud and the megaphone was not clear”.
Up next were the Jury questions, as Judge Navarro is allowing the Jury to ask questions of their own of the witnesses. Question one, “when you heard about the rally did you go just to see it or to participate, and why did you record it”? Ellis told the Jury that “I went with Flynn and we recorded it because we were reporting on it”. Question two, “you were seventeen a the time, was this your first time in a crowd this large with people with weapons”? Ellis answered “no, I have been to the shooting range before and things like that, but this was different”. Question three, “in governments exhibit #11 you can hear Flynn saying, ‘hit the ground if they start firing’. What was your feeling at the time”? Ellis said, “yes, I was in fear that either side would start firing”. The Jury then asked to “please label the bridges because there is only one in the photo”.
The afternoon session began with Trey Shillie from the US Forest Service in Colorado. Shillie was vacationing in Las Vegas and traveling back to Colorado when the Protest at the bridge took place. Shillie testified that he stopped and took photos of the events on the bridge. One of the photos that he took and was asked about during Prosecution testimony was Eric Parker ‘prone on the bridge’ with the barrel of his gun in between the concrete barriers.. Shillie told the court Parker was pointing his weapon toward the wash. Shillie was asked in the other men had firearms? Shillie said, “he couldn’t recall, but Parker was pointing toward the fence and the Bureau Of Land Management”. At this point courtroom observers report that it doesn’t have to be Law Enforcement to see, and perceive a threat for it to be a crime. The Prosecution is making the case that if Trey Shillie perceives a threat by someone pointing a weapon in this case, it is a threat weather he reports it to Law Enforcement or not. Therefore Law Enforcement is threatened, whether they know about it or not. In other words, Shillie, in this instance, was transfigured/transformed into a Law Enforcement Officer at the scene and the threat he perceived is a valid threat, although Law Enforcement Officers were within shouting distance. Therefore he can testify to the threat to Law Enforcement.
Cross examination began with Jess Marchese asking Trey Shillie if the photos that were entered into evidence including, the man on the bridge, the Protestors at the gate. In all there were 8 photos. Shillie was asked if they were in chronological order? The reporter failed to record an answer. Marchese established through questioning that Shillie acknowledged that Parker’s finder was not on the trigger. Marchese brought up other aspects contained within the photos Trey Shillie took bringing attention to colored hats, different hats, people who were crouched down, people that didn’t have weapons all of this to prove to the Jury that there were other people besides Eric Parker depicting this behavior demonized by the Prosecution.
Richard Tanasi was next to question the witness. Tanasi began by reminding Shillie that he said he was afraid of Law Enforcement Officers on scene. Saying, “you met with the FBI but you didn’t tell them you were afraid of Law Enforcement Officers”? This drew objection. The Defense through argument was trying to prove that Trey Shillie’s FBI report did not contain the information because he didn’t write it the FBI wrote in and Shillie signed his name to it. During questioning Trey Shillie divulged he met with the US Attorney’s Office three times and the FBI four times.
Todd Leventhal was next to cross examine Trey Shillie bringing out the information that Shillie spent 35 - 40 minutes in traffic and only about 10 - 15 minutes on the bridge. Shillie said he only saw 15 -20 Law Enforcement Officers. Leventhal showed several photos of Protestors in the wash pointing out that in some photos the Protestors were not at the gate, but that in others they were at the gate, making the point that because BLM/NPS moved to the gate so did the Protestors. Leventhal also points out different hats, people crouched and moving in different ways. Leventhal then pointed out Nevada Highway Patrol in his photos asking Shillie, “if you perceived a threat, why didn’t you go down and speak to the Nevada Highway Patrol? Instead you got into your car and proceeded to drive to Denver! You didn’t call for an ambulance. You didn’t call 911, and you didn’t walk down the street and talk to Nevada Highway Patrol” and tell them about the threat. Shillie’s response was “there were so many officers there, I figured they already knew”. Shillie also said he figured the areal surveillance was Law Enforcement and they would have access to any of that information.
At this point the Prosecution had to do some damage control so in redirect they asked Trey Shillie if the government did anything but ask him to tell the truth? No response was reported, but we gan guess the answer. Now for some of those most anticipated Jury questions. First question. “did you witness Parker pointing his weapon at a certain person or in a general area”? Shillie’s answer, “general area”. Second, “if you were so concerned for Law Enforcement, why didn’t you approach Law Enforcement on the bridge”? The reporter fails to give the response. Question Three, “did you ask anyone on the bridge why they were there or what was going on”? Shillie told the Jury “no, the only people I talked to was the friends he was traveling with”. Fourth question, “did the FBI know you had taken photos on the bridge and did you give them to them voluntarily”? Shillie told the Jury that he works for the USFS when he went back to work he gave the photos to them the next business day, he saw it on the news the USFS gave them to the FBI, so yet voluntarily. Fifth, “why didn’t you tell Law Enforcement about the ‘prone guy’ on the bridge”? He “assumed everyone has seen what he had seen”. Sixth, “are the Defendants being tried together or separately”? The Judge didn’t want to answer this saying, “I’ll answer this at the end of the trial, but I don’t want to leave you questioning so, they are bing tried separately on the same counts”. Seven, “did you talk to anyone on the bridge”? Shillie’s answer was “no, I only talked to my friends”. Eight, “you feared for Law Enforcement did you also fear for yourself”? The short answer was “yes”, but Shillie did go on at some length in his answer but was stopped by the Judge from continuing because he was going into the BLM’s actions.
Todd Leventhal stepped forward again in re-cross examination establishing the fact Shillie was in fear and asked, “how did you know the plane in the air was Law Enforcement”? He just said, “they have access to that”.
Jess Marchese asked Trey Shillie again, “why didn’t you ask anyone what was going on? Did you do independent research? How did you know to turn your photos in”? Responding, “yes” indicating he had seen similar photos on the internet. At that point the Prosecution objected and the question was dropped.
Richard Tansai got up and said to Shillie, “Parker did not point his weapon at you”? Shillie said, “no”. Tanasi said, the only people who pointed weapons were the BLM. Drawing objection.
The Judge now says, “in the first photo everyone is standing and no one is pointing guns, then you see the ‘prone man’”? “After the photo in the wash” he said.
Next the Prosecution calls Sargent Shannon Serena from Nevada Highway Patrol who testified in the last trial a few months ago. Under questioning from the Prosecutions Serena stated that on April 12, 2014 he was at the Moapa Substation. He was there to put up a K-Rail System to help the BLM exit the area, but then his duties changed. He was given an assignment to go assist officers being held at gunpoint and he was to take his crew to assist them. Serena testified that this happened at 11:00 a.m. which contradicts his testimony last trial. Serena testified that after he received the call to go assist the officers, at 11:30 a.m. he headed to the scene amongst heavy traffic. Serena sees a person in the road stopping traffic walking back and fourth through traffic with an assault riffle. Serena made a decision to go down the middle of the road because traffic was so thick he couldn’t get people to pull over stating, that was a danger to him because on the sides of the road in all the vehicles there were people in military outfits, with weapons, all staring at him and his officers, and they were very intimidated by that. The fact being most people on site were dressed only in street clothes. As Serena arrived at the Northbound bridge he pointed out Todd Engel. Serena noticed him because he had a gun who came up to him and had a conversation saying Engel told him about people with riffles aiming them at him. Serena told the court how Ricky Lovelien then showed up and that Engel stopped talking to him when Lovelien showed up stating, “I was very concerned because they were both heavily armed and not very friendly”. Although the two men approached him. Last trial Serena said Engel was very friendly and helpful the entire time until Lovelien approached them. Serena then testified that Engel “stuck his riffle over the barrier and started pointing it into the wash”. Serena this time around tried to place emphasis on the direction he was facing during all of this because it was heavily challenged during the first trial, because you don’t have eyes in the back of your head! Serena said he had two groups of 6 - 7 Highway Patrol there with him saying, “we were outnumbered by hundreds and it was not a sage environment”. This concluded Sargent Shannon Serena’s testimony for the Prosecution.
Richard Tanasi was first to cross examine Sargent Serena saying, “you were asked to set up a K-Rail System for the BLM, but you were not asked to help in the cattle roundup or the transportation of the cattle or the selling of the cattle? So why the K-Rail System”? No answer was reported, but Tanasi pointed out the Serena that he made a report two days later where he said he did not have a fear of these men pointing and shooting weapons but by accidental discharge, and that if that happened “it could set the whole event off”. Tanasi then asked, “were the BLM there”? Answering, “yes” How many? "I do not recall”. Where National Park Service there? Serena, “I don’t recall”. Dan Love would be proud! Was the FBI there? Serena, “I don’t know”. Was SWAT there? “I don’t know”. How many Metro Officers did you see? Serena, “10 - 12”. Didn’t he get any background information from dispatch other than there were officers being held at gunpoint? But, I guess he didn’t think to use his radio to ask for details, and, apparently he had blinders on because he didn’t see all the other Law Enforcement on scene. Courtroom observers report that this questioning is being heavily objected to by the Prosecution all the was through.
Shawn Perez was next to question the witness showing Serena photos and asked him to show where the bridge starts? Serena, during questioning tells the Jury the truth is he, Engel and Lovelien aren’t even on the bridge. If fact quite a distance away from it. The photos also show Ricky drinking water, and sitting on the barrier for a good amount of time.
Jess Marchese then questioned the witness, pointing out a photo that depicts Rick’s truck and asked Serena about the guys in military clothing and said, “they had BDU’s on, another word for cargo pants he explained, and boots. Although Steven Stewart and Scott Drexler were in street clothes. Marchese asked about individuals pointing guns at an officer, which brought about an objection, a side bar. The Judge sustained it and the questioning was abandoned. Serena was then asked about the conversation he had with Todd Engel and how it had come to a stop. Marchese used video evidence from the Dash Cam showing several vehicles captured on video to prove to the Jury that there was a timeline that the Defense could prove through timestamps that at the time Sargent Serena left to come to the Northbound bridge there were NOT men pointing guns and holding officers at gunpoint. Marchese asked Serena if when Todd walked up to him if he was pointing his weapon over the barrier? Serena indicated, “yes, he was, and he immediately asked him what was going on while he pulled his weapon back down”. This was the end of proceedings today. Tomorrow court will resume with Sargent Shannon Serena on the stand.
Just a few things to wrap it up. What is proven time and time again in these trials in that if you have to be coached by the US Attorney’s Office and the FBI IT’S NOT YOUR TESTIMONY! Next, Sargent Shannon Serena has committed perjury on the stand! According to his testimony last time, today’s testimony differs greatly. We are recommending everyone who cares a whit about this case should contact Nevada State Highway Patrol and as for the arrest of Sargent Serena for perjury. Ask them to defend their policy of having their officers show up to court and lie on the stand in an attempt to incarcerate the public under false pretenses. Click the text above for contact information. Courtroom observers are apauled at Judge Gloria Navarro’s behavior in court, but are encouraged with the Juror questions. They indicate that one Juror in particular is “very very awake”. That gives them hope for the Defendants. They also testified to the fact that when Richard Tanasi entered into evidence in his motion three instances of case law SHOWING that in some circumstances “state of mind” evidence can be presented, although Navarro shot it down. The observers also shot down the governments case for accusing the Defense of dismissing potential jury members because of bias. Get the truth about the governments deception in their accusation in the text link Batson vs Kentucky. Courtroom observers also pointed out that if Sargent Shannon Serena’s situation, when he received an assignment change, was so dire, why was he directing traffic when he arrived on scene while his fellow officers were in such peril? The answer, because they weren’t!
Richard Tanasi was the first to re-cross examine Earl J. McEwen on the stand. He was the video camera operator in the Cessna that flew 12,000 feet over Bunkerville on April 14, 2014 capturing footage of the scene that resembled an ant farm. McEwen testified that he saw people ‘prone on the bride’ when courtroom observers say you couldn’t see anything in detail at that distance. Tanasi began his questioning with, “when did you find out that they were in the prone and crouching position”? McEwen testified that “when reviewing the tape for this trial is when I found out”, not the previous trial held months ago. Tanasi then asked who was at the meeting where he disclosed this information? Stating, “there were many people among them the Prosecution”. Tanasi asked McEwen, “was the FBI there”? He responded “yes”. That concluded the re-cross examination of McEwen.
 |
| See The View Eric Parker Had by Watching the Video |
Richard Tanasi then went into cross examination of Alex Ellis who traveled to Bunkerville with, now deceased, Michael Flynn. Both from Utah, working with The Independent News outlet. With video camera in hand they went about the crowd asking inflammatory question to the Protestors. Many times separated from each other having their own experiences. Ellis is a Prosecution witness testifying to the film footage of Flynn, but was not personally present when Flynn did his filming. The Defense has been in opposition to this testimony because it is not a personal eyewitness account. It is hearsay at least and speculation at worst. Tanasi spent some time questioning Ellis about his position on the bridge and in the wash during the tense moments on April 12, 2014. Tanasi presented a photo of the Nevada State Highway Patrol truck. This was immediately objected to. The Prosecution stating this witness cannot identify trucks! There was questioning by the Judge asking, “are you just trying to identify what is in the video, or are you asking what he is seeing when he was there”? Ellis is allowed to answer the question with, “I do not recall”. Coached well by the Prosecution while suffering his emergency medical condition several days ago. Ellis disclosed that prior to his testimony last week he met with the US Attorneys three times and the FBI twice.
Jess Marchese was next to cross examine the witness saying, “on April 12, 2014 you went to Bunkerville, in your video you identified Eric Parker. You said you saw him previously at the stage. You said he had a weapon, but later you go in and they show you the photos and you didn’t actually have a weapon, he was unarmed”. Asking, “what made him stick out”? Alex Ellis said, “he was wearing a chest rig with magazines”. Marchese said, “others were wearing chest rigs”. Ellis responded, “yes, but others were wearing camo and you could tell they were part of a group. This man was alone”. Ellis was then asked about the event at the stage where Gillespie announced that the Bureau Of Land Management was ceasing operations and Gold Butte was being re-opened. Asking Ellis, “do you know where Gold Butte is”? Ellis did not know. Marchese continued, “lots of people were there. Did you see Eric Parker when you arrived at the parking spot”? Responding “no”. Then Marchese said, “most people were going to the Northbound bridge and you joined them. Where they walking or running”? Ellis responded, “it was kind of a mixture”. Next Marchese asked Ellis “when you were down at the wash did you alternate putting your back to the Northbound bridge and the Southbound bridge”? He answered, “yes”. The Judge at this time interrupts with her own question, “when you and Flynn are separated are you watching Flynn”? This is seen as a defense tactic because she can see the Defense making headway proving to the Jury that Ellis and Flynn were separated many times during Flynn’s filming his video, and thereby, his testimony should be impeached as only opinion by Ellis.
Todd Leventhal was up next to question Ellis saying, “you drove with Flynn in his car with Utah plates. Why did you go”? This drew objection from the Prosecution sighting that it was bias. A side bar was called and in the end, Judge Navarro sustained the objection. Leventhal proceeded to ask Ellis about cameras in the video footage, and asked, “did you see Mr. Drexler when you were at the rally”? Ellis stating, “yes I did. I could tell because he was wearing a chest plate with magazines”. Ellis is asked to circle Scott Drexler on a photo. Ellis circles Eric Parker in stead. Ellis during further questioning realized he had circled the wrong person and said, “I got that confused”. He erased his circle and circled Steven Stewart this time as Drexler. The Judge then interrupts with her own question, “do you know this man by first name”? Ellis answering “no”. There was an objection to using Ellis to identify people. It was sustained and Leventhal continued asking Ellis questions. “When did you come to know the names of these people”? Ellis’ answer, “after I visited with the government”. There was a lot of going through the videos and identifying hats, cameras, flags, and lots of camo, everything except for guns. Leventhal presented video footage of the BLM asking, “did you see these men from the Northbound bridge”? Ellis answering, “yes I did”. “Did you see them pointing weapons”? He said, “no, I could not make that out from where I was standing”. Leventhal then asked if the videos were in sequential order? The reporter failed to give an answer. Ellis was then asked, “in this video Flynn asked you to take a note, asking you to see if you could hear what the BLM was saying. How did you answer that”? Ellis said, “they were on a megaphone and it was hard to hear them because the crowd was being loud and the megaphone was not clear”.
Up next were the Jury questions, as Judge Navarro is allowing the Jury to ask questions of their own of the witnesses. Question one, “when you heard about the rally did you go just to see it or to participate, and why did you record it”? Ellis told the Jury that “I went with Flynn and we recorded it because we were reporting on it”. Question two, “you were seventeen a the time, was this your first time in a crowd this large with people with weapons”? Ellis answered “no, I have been to the shooting range before and things like that, but this was different”. Question three, “in governments exhibit #11 you can hear Flynn saying, ‘hit the ground if they start firing’. What was your feeling at the time”? Ellis said, “yes, I was in fear that either side would start firing”. The Jury then asked to “please label the bridges because there is only one in the photo”.
The afternoon session began with Trey Shillie from the US Forest Service in Colorado. Shillie was vacationing in Las Vegas and traveling back to Colorado when the Protest at the bridge took place. Shillie testified that he stopped and took photos of the events on the bridge. One of the photos that he took and was asked about during Prosecution testimony was Eric Parker ‘prone on the bridge’ with the barrel of his gun in between the concrete barriers.. Shillie told the court Parker was pointing his weapon toward the wash. Shillie was asked in the other men had firearms? Shillie said, “he couldn’t recall, but Parker was pointing toward the fence and the Bureau Of Land Management”. At this point courtroom observers report that it doesn’t have to be Law Enforcement to see, and perceive a threat for it to be a crime. The Prosecution is making the case that if Trey Shillie perceives a threat by someone pointing a weapon in this case, it is a threat weather he reports it to Law Enforcement or not. Therefore Law Enforcement is threatened, whether they know about it or not. In other words, Shillie, in this instance, was transfigured/transformed into a Law Enforcement Officer at the scene and the threat he perceived is a valid threat, although Law Enforcement Officers were within shouting distance. Therefore he can testify to the threat to Law Enforcement.
Cross examination began with Jess Marchese asking Trey Shillie if the photos that were entered into evidence including, the man on the bridge, the Protestors at the gate. In all there were 8 photos. Shillie was asked if they were in chronological order? The reporter failed to record an answer. Marchese established through questioning that Shillie acknowledged that Parker’s finder was not on the trigger. Marchese brought up other aspects contained within the photos Trey Shillie took bringing attention to colored hats, different hats, people who were crouched down, people that didn’t have weapons all of this to prove to the Jury that there were other people besides Eric Parker depicting this behavior demonized by the Prosecution.
Richard Tanasi was next to question the witness. Tanasi began by reminding Shillie that he said he was afraid of Law Enforcement Officers on scene. Saying, “you met with the FBI but you didn’t tell them you were afraid of Law Enforcement Officers”? This drew objection. The Defense through argument was trying to prove that Trey Shillie’s FBI report did not contain the information because he didn’t write it the FBI wrote in and Shillie signed his name to it. During questioning Trey Shillie divulged he met with the US Attorney’s Office three times and the FBI four times.
Todd Leventhal was next to cross examine Trey Shillie bringing out the information that Shillie spent 35 - 40 minutes in traffic and only about 10 - 15 minutes on the bridge. Shillie said he only saw 15 -20 Law Enforcement Officers. Leventhal showed several photos of Protestors in the wash pointing out that in some photos the Protestors were not at the gate, but that in others they were at the gate, making the point that because BLM/NPS moved to the gate so did the Protestors. Leventhal also points out different hats, people crouched and moving in different ways. Leventhal then pointed out Nevada Highway Patrol in his photos asking Shillie, “if you perceived a threat, why didn’t you go down and speak to the Nevada Highway Patrol? Instead you got into your car and proceeded to drive to Denver! You didn’t call for an ambulance. You didn’t call 911, and you didn’t walk down the street and talk to Nevada Highway Patrol” and tell them about the threat. Shillie’s response was “there were so many officers there, I figured they already knew”. Shillie also said he figured the areal surveillance was Law Enforcement and they would have access to any of that information.
At this point the Prosecution had to do some damage control so in redirect they asked Trey Shillie if the government did anything but ask him to tell the truth? No response was reported, but we gan guess the answer. Now for some of those most anticipated Jury questions. First question. “did you witness Parker pointing his weapon at a certain person or in a general area”? Shillie’s answer, “general area”. Second, “if you were so concerned for Law Enforcement, why didn’t you approach Law Enforcement on the bridge”? The reporter fails to give the response. Question Three, “did you ask anyone on the bridge why they were there or what was going on”? Shillie told the Jury “no, the only people I talked to was the friends he was traveling with”. Fourth question, “did the FBI know you had taken photos on the bridge and did you give them to them voluntarily”? Shillie told the Jury that he works for the USFS when he went back to work he gave the photos to them the next business day, he saw it on the news the USFS gave them to the FBI, so yet voluntarily. Fifth, “why didn’t you tell Law Enforcement about the ‘prone guy’ on the bridge”? He “assumed everyone has seen what he had seen”. Sixth, “are the Defendants being tried together or separately”? The Judge didn’t want to answer this saying, “I’ll answer this at the end of the trial, but I don’t want to leave you questioning so, they are bing tried separately on the same counts”. Seven, “did you talk to anyone on the bridge”? Shillie’s answer was “no, I only talked to my friends”. Eight, “you feared for Law Enforcement did you also fear for yourself”? The short answer was “yes”, but Shillie did go on at some length in his answer but was stopped by the Judge from continuing because he was going into the BLM’s actions.
Todd Leventhal stepped forward again in re-cross examination establishing the fact Shillie was in fear and asked, “how did you know the plane in the air was Law Enforcement”? He just said, “they have access to that”.
Jess Marchese asked Trey Shillie again, “why didn’t you ask anyone what was going on? Did you do independent research? How did you know to turn your photos in”? Responding, “yes” indicating he had seen similar photos on the internet. At that point the Prosecution objected and the question was dropped.
Richard Tansai got up and said to Shillie, “Parker did not point his weapon at you”? Shillie said, “no”. Tanasi said, the only people who pointed weapons were the BLM. Drawing objection.
The Judge now says, “in the first photo everyone is standing and no one is pointing guns, then you see the ‘prone man’”? “After the photo in the wash” he said.
Next the Prosecution calls Sargent Shannon Serena from Nevada Highway Patrol who testified in the last trial a few months ago. Under questioning from the Prosecutions Serena stated that on April 12, 2014 he was at the Moapa Substation. He was there to put up a K-Rail System to help the BLM exit the area, but then his duties changed. He was given an assignment to go assist officers being held at gunpoint and he was to take his crew to assist them. Serena testified that this happened at 11:00 a.m. which contradicts his testimony last trial. Serena testified that after he received the call to go assist the officers, at 11:30 a.m. he headed to the scene amongst heavy traffic. Serena sees a person in the road stopping traffic walking back and fourth through traffic with an assault riffle. Serena made a decision to go down the middle of the road because traffic was so thick he couldn’t get people to pull over stating, that was a danger to him because on the sides of the road in all the vehicles there were people in military outfits, with weapons, all staring at him and his officers, and they were very intimidated by that. The fact being most people on site were dressed only in street clothes. As Serena arrived at the Northbound bridge he pointed out Todd Engel. Serena noticed him because he had a gun who came up to him and had a conversation saying Engel told him about people with riffles aiming them at him. Serena told the court how Ricky Lovelien then showed up and that Engel stopped talking to him when Lovelien showed up stating, “I was very concerned because they were both heavily armed and not very friendly”. Although the two men approached him. Last trial Serena said Engel was very friendly and helpful the entire time until Lovelien approached them. Serena then testified that Engel “stuck his riffle over the barrier and started pointing it into the wash”. Serena this time around tried to place emphasis on the direction he was facing during all of this because it was heavily challenged during the first trial, because you don’t have eyes in the back of your head! Serena said he had two groups of 6 - 7 Highway Patrol there with him saying, “we were outnumbered by hundreds and it was not a sage environment”. This concluded Sargent Shannon Serena’s testimony for the Prosecution.
Richard Tanasi was first to cross examine Sargent Serena saying, “you were asked to set up a K-Rail System for the BLM, but you were not asked to help in the cattle roundup or the transportation of the cattle or the selling of the cattle? So why the K-Rail System”? No answer was reported, but Tanasi pointed out the Serena that he made a report two days later where he said he did not have a fear of these men pointing and shooting weapons but by accidental discharge, and that if that happened “it could set the whole event off”. Tanasi then asked, “were the BLM there”? Answering, “yes” How many? "I do not recall”. Where National Park Service there? Serena, “I don’t recall”. Dan Love would be proud! Was the FBI there? Serena, “I don’t know”. Was SWAT there? “I don’t know”. How many Metro Officers did you see? Serena, “10 - 12”. Didn’t he get any background information from dispatch other than there were officers being held at gunpoint? But, I guess he didn’t think to use his radio to ask for details, and, apparently he had blinders on because he didn’t see all the other Law Enforcement on scene. Courtroom observers report that this questioning is being heavily objected to by the Prosecution all the was through.
Shawn Perez was next to question the witness showing Serena photos and asked him to show where the bridge starts? Serena, during questioning tells the Jury the truth is he, Engel and Lovelien aren’t even on the bridge. If fact quite a distance away from it. The photos also show Ricky drinking water, and sitting on the barrier for a good amount of time.
Jess Marchese then questioned the witness, pointing out a photo that depicts Rick’s truck and asked Serena about the guys in military clothing and said, “they had BDU’s on, another word for cargo pants he explained, and boots. Although Steven Stewart and Scott Drexler were in street clothes. Marchese asked about individuals pointing guns at an officer, which brought about an objection, a side bar. The Judge sustained it and the questioning was abandoned. Serena was then asked about the conversation he had with Todd Engel and how it had come to a stop. Marchese used video evidence from the Dash Cam showing several vehicles captured on video to prove to the Jury that there was a timeline that the Defense could prove through timestamps that at the time Sargent Serena left to come to the Northbound bridge there were NOT men pointing guns and holding officers at gunpoint. Marchese asked Serena if when Todd walked up to him if he was pointing his weapon over the barrier? Serena indicated, “yes, he was, and he immediately asked him what was going on while he pulled his weapon back down”. This was the end of proceedings today. Tomorrow court will resume with Sargent Shannon Serena on the stand.
Just a few things to wrap it up. What is proven time and time again in these trials in that if you have to be coached by the US Attorney’s Office and the FBI IT’S NOT YOUR TESTIMONY! Next, Sargent Shannon Serena has committed perjury on the stand! According to his testimony last time, today’s testimony differs greatly. We are recommending everyone who cares a whit about this case should contact Nevada State Highway Patrol and as for the arrest of Sargent Serena for perjury. Ask them to defend their policy of having their officers show up to court and lie on the stand in an attempt to incarcerate the public under false pretenses. Click the text above for contact information. Courtroom observers are apauled at Judge Gloria Navarro’s behavior in court, but are encouraged with the Juror questions. They indicate that one Juror in particular is “very very awake”. That gives them hope for the Defendants. They also testified to the fact that when Richard Tanasi entered into evidence in his motion three instances of case law SHOWING that in some circumstances “state of mind” evidence can be presented, although Navarro shot it down. The observers also shot down the governments case for accusing the Defense of dismissing potential jury members because of bias. Get the truth about the governments deception in their accusation in the text link Batson vs Kentucky. Courtroom observers also pointed out that if Sargent Shannon Serena’s situation, when he received an assignment change, was so dire, why was he directing traffic when he arrived on scene while his fellow officers were in such peril? The answer, because they weren’t!
July 20, 2017
Today's court session was to begin by Alex Ellis being cross examined by the Defense. Ellis checked himself in the an Urgent Care Clinic and was not available for questioning until Monday. Terry M. Petrie DOJ Attorney for the Environmental and Natural Resources Division who has been working with former Nevada DOJ Daniel Bogden as they have harassed Cliven Bundy with court injunctions including this one in 1999. The Prosecution and Petrie bored the Jury and observers with their paperwork relating to Cliven Bundy's court orders when they should have saved this for Cliven's trial. These four men have no connection to the mumbo-jumbo, it only relates to the conspiracy the government entered into to get Bundy's land once and for all! In the end, Harry Reid was successful as he "went a beggin'" to Obama for a National Monument in Butte! This just shows the government conspiracy goes right to the top! If it takes years to accomplish their goal, they are willing to work tirelessly to that end. There is no sense in going in to any of the details. It you know anything about the Bundy Case you already know what the paperwork says. If not here's a tidbit.
There was no cross examination back and forth reported by the observers, so up nest was the Jury questions. First question, "why was there such a large gap in time between court orders"? Petrie responded, "I glimpsed some concern from the government in that they could successfully remove the cattle. The government in 2011 took interest in the Bundy cattle and land again". Petrie rambled on and on in his answer, once again, putting people to sleep, but this is the short version of what he said. Second question, "did Cliven Bundy continue filing from 1999 to 2012"? Petrie answered, "yes". Third, "were the legal proceedings between Cliven and the government"? Petrie, "yes". Fourth, "does the US Government allow grazing rights on US Land"? Petrie answered, "yes". Fifth, "did the land Cliven Bundy's cattle were on permit grazing"? Petrie answered, "the land of the Bunkerville allotment has been removed from grazing purposes". Sixth, "Cliven's check was sent to the wrong department (County)? Couldn't it have been sent to the correct department"? Petries answer was, "yes". Then Judge Gloria Navarro said, "could the Bureau of Land Management cash a check to Clark County"? Petrie answered to Judges impromptu question with, "no", once again leading the Prosecutions case. Seven, "did an order to Cliven apply to only him, or his son's as well"? Although Mr. Petrie has been working on Cliven's case since at least 1999, he claimed not to know the answer to this one! Eight, "how do the BLM know the cattle belong to Mr. Bundy"? Petrie answered, "the brand". Nine, "are the allotments defined by fences or are they open range"? The reporter fails to report an answer to this one. Ten, "what transpired between 1998 and 2013 to reactivate the governments action on removing Cliven Bundy's cattle from the land"? Petrie fails to answer this question, but gives diatribes that only fill the air with meaningless words! Eleven, "why would the defendants want to get involved with people who are breaking the law by grazing cattle in that area"? Petrie didn't have the answer. Twelve, "was Steven Stewart's Attorney's question mean the court order didn't apply to Steven"? Petrie answered, "yes". Thirteen, "if Cliven has paid the fees would the cattle have not been trespassed"? No answer was given.
Richard Tanasi asked, "in 2001 what was the event that re-triggered the governments interest in Cliven's land and removing the cattle"? Once again, Mr. Petrie has been working on Cliven's case at least since 1999, BUT HE DOESN'T HAVE AN ANSWER!
The Jury had more questions, "are court orders effective during appeals"? Judge Navarro answers the question, although her job is to mediate and listen without tipping the scales one way or another, "yes! Unless there is a stay put forth. A stay is like a "pause button". This concluded Attorney Terry M. Petrie's testimony.
On the stand next was Gus Warr who works for the Bureau of Land Management and Department of the Interior, but he told the Jury he is not Law Enforcement. Gus Warr works as the Wild Horses and Burrow Specialist in Utah. Warr described how he was in charge of hiring the contractors etc. to work with the cattle. Warr was in charge of the cattle impoundment. The Prosecution has him tell the Jury how the brand inspection was done. He told the court that, "as soon as that is done, the cattle belong to the Federal Government. I was in charge and took care of them until they were sold at the Stock-house". Warr had several photos of cattle in the pens that were entered in to evidence. Warr pointed out that the cattle had tags that were glued on them showing that this was done after brand inspection, and it indicated the cattle now belonged to the Federal Government. Warr told the court they were to cease operations on April 11, 2014, but that just meant to, "get the new cattle. I sent all the other civilians home, but I was to stay on site until the cattle were sold". Warr told the Jury how hay had arrived so he could take care of the cattle the "entire time". During his testimony he told how on April 12, 2014 he had binoculars and could see groups and individuals gathering at the road around him and the other civilians. Quoting him, "we were civilians huddled in a trailer", after they had received "a call". Warr testified he had a radio/comms and could hear what was going on. Warr claimed there were Protesters on the ridge North of the bridge on I-15 on the ridges East and West of the ICP (Incident Command Post). In the last trial these "Protestors" Warr testified to were found to be BLM Snipers NOT Protestors! Is is possible Gus Warr was couched by the DOJ in his meetings with them before trial?
Richard Tanasi was first to cross examine Gus Warr His first question to Warr was, "on April 11, 2014 did you order the helicopter to shut down at 10:30 a.m., to cease the impound operation"? To which Warr answered "yes". Tanasi asked about the "threat level increase" on April 11th. Warr said that he "sent the crew home, but nothing occurred". Tanasi said, "on the morning of April 12, 2014 you said you saw people gathering. You were the only civilians"? Warr testified it was he and a group of civilians.
The Jury was allowed to ask BLM/DOI Gus Warr several questions. First question, "what happened to the 'non Bundy branded cattle'"? Warr answered, "they were still on site with the other cattle, but in a different pen". Second question, "what was your chain of command"? Warr stated that he, "reports to a Law Enforcement person". Anyone who knows anything about this event KNOWS that that person is Dan Love, but they have been coached not to speak his name for fear it will open a whole new can of worms, especially since the Jury is allowed to ask questions now. The next question from the Jury was, "what was your basis of concern on April 12, 2014"? Warr responded, "the Wild West is gone, and 'he' had weapons". One Juror asked, "well, all cowboys have guns, so what's the problem with that"? Warr told the Jury that, "I was the only civilian around with a gun, so everyone congregated around me". Another Juror posed the question, "would Bundy have received any money from the sale of the cattle"? Warr said, "no". Warr was asked, "did you receive any verbal or written threats"? Warr attempted to go in to a long diatribe about how others may have received threats, but when pressed for an answer responded, "no". The next question from the Jury was, "how are the boundaries written between Public/NPS and Private Lands"? The DOJ/Prosecution went in to a long narrative about the subject including laws without answering. In other words, they don't have a concise answer. They don't even know by what laws they are governed by! The Juror rephrased the question asking about fenced and un-fenced land. Warr made some reference to "maps on phones". Now! The government has been up to these land grabs for over a century now. Do they not have rules? Do they not have maps? What is going on here is a "make it up as you go along" charade! Next question from the Jury, "you stated several times that you were evacuated out of the North and were in fear for your life and scared at different times"? Warr described how he was in fear of his life. Another question, "since the cattle were released from the pens, does the government consider them stolen"? Warr was not allowed to answer because he was interrupted by the Judge saying she will answer at the end of the trial when she plans to talk about "the law". Next question, "when the cattle are transported, do they have to have a number"? The answer is "yes". That was followed by another description of the brand inspection process.
Richard Tanasi then stood for re-direct asking, "on April 12, 2014 you said you had no fear, and, you were scared, and you didn't want to get into a gun fight. You were interviewed by Kent Klayman and in that interview you did not tell him of your fear". This drew objection from the Prosecution. It was argued that the interview was done by media and not in reference to his written report. It was reported that Gus Warr had 3 visits with the FBI, 3 visits with the US Attorney's Office
Special Agent Earl J. McEwen who was in the Cessna 12,000 feet above the Protest at Bunkerville video taping the scene. It has been referred to as watching "the ant farm", in reference to the people, animals and vehicles recorded. So small they are almost indistinguishable. The entire video is not begin shown this time around, it is being showed in small clips. Agent McEwen's main testimony today was focused on, what the Prosecution is insisting is Eric Parker "lying prone on the bridge". Last go around the observers could not even tell if it was a person! The Prosecution had him circle this "person" in two clips. This is a case of the Prosecution creating evidence that supports their agenda. It is obvious that they summoned this footage after the fact and coached McEwan in his testimony and where to draw his circles. The video shown in court last trial took 2 days to go over! This time, less than a day. Observers say that what the government cut out of the footage this time was all of the BLM/NPS/Las Vegas Metro/Sheriff's Dept. and Nevada Highway Patrol! All of it was missing in this presentation, as if none of them were even there! Controlling the narrative!
Other happenings in court today. As court testimony was tediously laborious, one Juror was caught sleeping, which initiated a mandatory break so everyone could revive themselves. When the Jury exited the courtroom they took candy from the bowl Judge Navarro has provided them. Upon return to the courtroom Judge Navarro gave them a scolding! Telling them, "I put the bowl of candy there to help keep you from falling asleep so, when you come in, feel free to take a piece of candy. Just don't grab candy on the way out, it diminishes the effect. Maybe we can train you to be excited to be here". Also, another very peculiar thing happened today. All the Jurors wore Green today! Did Navarro send out a memo with the wardrobe assignment? Is she using mind control? Is the candy she is providing the Jury laced with something? It is very obvious to many that Judge Gloria Navarro is directly tampering with the Jury, really in plain sight! We need the Trump Administration to have the Judge go through an evaluation to determine if she is "fit for duty" at the very least. What we really want is the #RemoveNavarro
July 19, 2017
Court began today with Eric Parker and Steven Stewart sporting bare arms to make sure everyone, especially the Jury, could have a clear view of their tattoos. If you read yesterdays post you will remember that evidence consisting of a photo of Ricky Lovelien's lower arms which included his tattoos. The other Defendants were told the Prosecution was going to target each of the men because of their tattoos, so they wanted to head them off at the pass and proudly display them before the Prosecution went fourth to demonize them. Judge Gloria Navarro started things off by uttering her decree's, telling the Defendants there will be no mouthing words to the Jury during side bars. There will also be no writing things on notepads and showing them to the Jury, although that was a rumor the Prosecution started. Courtroom observers say it never happened.
Cross examination continued with FBI Agent Seyler. Shawn Perez for the Defense presented a facebook post by J.D. Parks. It was a private message to Ricky Lovelien. Perez proved to Agent Seyler that Ricky Lovelien did not respond to this private message, making the point before the court that not every message sent is actually seen or responded to, and this "guilt by association" is a pipe dream! Next Perez addressed a photo the Prosecution displayed yesterday of Ricky and Todd Engel. Yesterday the Prosecution presented testimony by Agent Seyler that Lovelien had his hand on the firearm, but Perez blew the photo up and got Agent Seyler to agree that Lovelien's hand was NEAR the firearm, NOT on it! During cross examination Perez exposed the fact that the government started it's "investigation" on Lovelien April 7, 2014 including Ryan Payne and Jerry Buckheart, but that investigation started in 2013. Next, Carol Bundy's facebook posts were examined, emphasizing the fact that "she wanted things to remain peaceful". Next, a facebook post from Randy Eaton was presented. Perez told the court, "what we are seeing is several media sources were talking about rising tensions, arresting the Protestors in a military style standoff". Perez went on to show several posts and comments of many people talking about the media reports and voicing concerns, proving the fact that his Defendant, Lovelien, was not an isolated case and he was not the leader co-leader of any conspiracy. Perez pointed out the language being used by the media and how it did create a sense of urgency to defend the Bundy's and Protestors against the show of force being displayed by the BLM/NPS/FBI.
Jess Marchese stood and addressed the Jury saying, "Agent Seyler is the man who arrested Eric Parker", which drew objection from the Prosecution sighting it was a statement made outside direct examination. So, Marchese recalled Seyler, with objection from the Prosecution. Marchese wanted to reveal the fact that all of this dialog they have recorded from Parker was taken before booking him into jail. They transported Eric Parker in Ketchum Idaho, NOT the town Parker lived in. It was on this 2 hour drive that Seyler recorded everything Parker said, before he had a lawyer available to him.
Richard Tanasi was up next pointing out to the Jury that none of all the bulk emails that were sent out my OMA/OMD and Lovelien and none were sent out to Steven Stewart directly. During his cross examination of Seyler he successfully got him to admit that he did not prove that some facebook posts from media etc. originated with Stewart. In other words, there is no way to prove something wasn't copied and pasted. Tanasi then asked Agent Seyler, "how do you know a facebook name is a real person"? Seyler responding, "well, what do you mean"? Tanasi pointed out using Seyler's list of 300 email/newsletter subscribers, "up there you see Billy The Kid. How do you know that it IS Billy The Kid? How do you know it's his real name"? Then Tanasi asked Seyler, "do you know Robyn Kirkham"? Robyn Kirkham was an undercover FBI Agent who, in January 2014 created an alias, created a facebook profile and started
representing herself as a "Bundy Supporter" This alone PROVES the fact that the government is the one guilty of conspiracy against the Bundy Family! The question drew objection from the Prosecution, and the Judge sustained it.
During cross examination of Sealer by Todd Leventhal the Agent admitted there were no phone calls to Scott Drexler. Using the government concocted "timeline" Leventhal pointed out that he left off the FACT that Sheriff Gillespie took the stage BEFORE Cliven Bundy and told the Protestors "the BLM has ceased operations. That they were removing their assets, and the public land was being re-opened".
Next up. The Jury questions, which Judge Gloria Navarro is allowing so she and the Prosecution can take the temperature of the Jury and declare a mistrial at any moment, forcing another trial where they can try to hit the next pitch! First question, "who's testimony was read by Seyler"? Someone answered, "that was Eric Parker's testimony from a previous hearing". Question number two, "what is OMA"? Someone answered, the reporter fails to identify, "that is the group started by Ryan Payne". Next, "what is OMA's mission"? The full mission statement was read to the Jury, although it had been submitted as evidence the Prosecution did not let the Jury see it on full display as they had to do now, although they only read certain lines to the Jury. The statement included a "who, what where, when and why". The website is no longer available online to link to. The statement says in part that, "they will work with local Law Enforcement when applicable. They will abide by the laws, as long as they agree with the State Constitution and the Union Constitution". Next, "how can you tell who made the phone call"? There was a big debate from both sides on this one since Seyler gave some convoluted story about hoping from cell phone to towers in any number of ways. Perez made a point before the Jury that you can't be sure who made a phone call unless you have a photo of the person actually doing so with a timestamp. For instance he asked Seyler, "a phone call was made last night using my phone at 9:00 p.m. Can you tell me who that person was"? Seyler could not answer so, the Judge stepped in with her explanation saying, "circumstantial evidence is, a person walks into the courtroom with an umbrella wearing a rain coat, you can deduce that it's raining outside. Direct evidence is, that you SEE that it's raining outside. Therefore the Jury will have to give weight to that testimony". The next question from the Jury was, "how can you be sure a cut and paste post has been edited"? The answer was, "they could not". Next question, "when reviewing the facebook address for the names, can you identify their aliases"? This brought about another lengthy discussion back and fourth between Seyler, the Prosecution and the Defense containing the "Billy The Kid" reference. After some discussion Agent Seyler finally admitted that "the only people we looked into of the many people on a particular thread, was the people they were investigating". Uncovering the fact that they didn't try to find out who Billy The Kid was, or if Robyn Kirkham was up to her old tricks creating aliases and going about her nefarious tactics and, they didn't care, as long as they used people like pawns on their plan to build a conspiracy. Their modus operandi is to get people to engage and to incriminate themselves. The nasty thing about it is that these Agents creating fake profiles and spouting off at the mouth is being used as evidence against the Defendants in a court case that could put them in prison for life. Trap set. Caught the bait! Their reason for mounting up against you is merely that they sent a message to you. That's it! The next question was, "why would you come armed when you are just 'crowd control' and to round up cattle if you did not intend to use them"? The Juror was told that Agent Seyler could not answer that question. Lastly, "were any of the Defendants communicated with directly by Mr. Payne"? Seyler answered by saying, "Mr. Payne did many interviews with media and he was quoted in those interviews and Parker and Stewart read those articles". A non answer, when it should have been, "no"! Prosecution finished up by redirecting the copy and paste question to Agent Seyler, "in order to copy and paste something, does someone actually have to push copy and paste"? Seyler answered, "yes". The Defense ended with Marchese trying to re-address Eric Parker's testimony entered into evidence by the Prosecution, but was prevented from doing so with the Judge saying, "just because the Jury asks a question doesn't allow you to do so".
Interesting happenings in court today. A female FBI Agent sitting behind the Prosecution was snapping away at a piece of gun and BLOWING BUBBLES! While the courtroom observers are not allowed to chew gun and can't have as much as a Tic Tac! Nothing was said by the Judge. Judge Gloria Navarro is now providing a bowl of assorted candy for the Jury to snack on during her 30 minute long side bars, while courtroom observers cannot have a bottle of water over 16 oz. (a notice is now posted outside the courtroom announcing this "rule").
After a break for lunch, Bureau of Land Management Special Agent Adam Sully, who served as a Ranger previously. Agent Sully went undercover and was infiltrating the Bundy family and their supporters. Agent Sully helped in erecting the large posts where banners were flown such as the "Liberty Freedom For God We Stand". It is clear that by him doing this long before April 12, 2014 he was instrumental in the governments plan to entrap the Bundy Family, no holds barred! Sully took several photos while masquerading as part of the support group, which included photos of Ryan Payne, Ricky Lovelien, Jim Laurdy and the Bundy's. Agent Sully's assignment was to identify "these people". Sully testified that he "saw Mel Bundy speak with Ryan Payne as he said, 'some militia would not come until an event took place'". Sully also witnessed Mel talking to "another guy". Mel asked the man if he was part of the militia? To which the man replied "no". Mel told the man there were to separate camps, one for the militia and a general camp. Sully went in to information having to do with a man James/Jim Laudry (sp?), who identified Ricky Lovelien from a photo presented to him. This was the only bit of information the reporter gave concerning Laurdy at this point. The Sully went in to talking about a "J.T." and how he told him about the "militia camp" and how "that's where the important decisions are made. He had better weapons than the BLM and a vehicle full of ammo"! Sully told the Jury that he was sent there to go "undercover" at "these events/rallies" just to talk to people and see if "anyone" had made a plan to "interfere". This concluded his testimony.
Shawn Perez began cross examination of BLM Special Agent Sully with making a statement, "so this J.T. whomever he is, said, 'important decisions would be made at the militia camp' instead of this hippy camp" which brought objections from the Prosecution. It was sustained and Perez got Agent Sully to admit he didn't know who J.T. was.
Richard Tanasi approached the witness and said, "you were presented photos of Ricky, Ryan and the Bundy's, but you were not given photos of Steven Stewart"? To which Agent Sully gave the answer most used by government employees when being questioned, "I don't recall". Dan Love would be proud. Agent Sully responded the same when asked about Eric Parker and Scott Drexler. Agent Sully was next asked about helicopters being used by Law Enforcement on the 11th of April 2014. Sully responded "he did not recall helicopters being used that day". Sully was asked how many times he met with the US Attorney's Office? Sully responded, "3-4 times". He also met with the FBI twice where they went through possible cross examination questions.
Todd Leventhal was up next to question the witness asking Sully, "were you ever undercover in an event other than this"? Responding, "yes". Leventhal questioned Sully about a "sign" he was photographed holding, but that drew objection from the Prosecution that was sustained. Leventhal then asked Sully about a large group of media there. Sully didn't know what they were doing there. Leventhal asked several questions about "J.T." but they were not shared during this report.
Up next was the portion of proceedings in which Judge Gloria Navarro has asked the Jury to submit the questions they would like answered, they are the following. First question, "prior to April 11, 2014 have you been undercover"? BLM Special Agent Sully responded, "yes". Second question, "how many people were at the rally on April 7, 2014"? Agent Sully responded "around 200". Next question, "can you describe the difference between the different militias? Is their clothing different, or any other identifying features to differentiate from the Arizona Militia, the Montana Militia"? Agent Sully said, "no, I was not given that type of information". Next, "did your conversation between you and J.T. give you a reason to look into him more considering his comment about the ammo"? Sully responded, "no, we were not familiar with him and he decided not to look into it. It wasn't my choice to look into it". J.T. could be just another informant or didn't fit into the governments "box", so he dropped it. Next question, "what were you wearing"? Sully answered, "Wranglers, boots, cowboy hat". He was then asked "did you carry a firearm"? To which he responded, "I was not, or didn't think so". The Jury then asked Agent Sully "what vehicle did you drive"? Sully told the Jury, "the first time, it was an unmarked rental and, possibly, a Dodge pickup the second time". Next question, "how can the statements of an unknown individual "J.T." impact the Defendants"? The reporter fails to give the answer to this one. The next question from the Jury, "can the general camp and the militia camp be marked on a map"? The court was recessed for a short time while they located a map and marked the camps for presentation to the Jury.
Richard Tanasi went into some re-direct after the Jury questions by asking Special Agent Sully, "at the height of the media presence, how many supporters were there"? To which he answered, "about 200". This completed testimony by FBI Special Agent Adam Sully.
Next witness for the Prosecution was Alex Ellis who was there with coworker Michael Flynn documenting the Protest on film. Both were from Utah. Since Flynn is now deceased, Ellis is the Prosecutions was of getting Flynn's video submitted into evidence, although he is not an eyewitness to video Flynn was present for. Each took separate video. Ellis and Flynn used tactics in their reporting that consisted of inflammatory language in order to get a the intended response. Alex Ellis told the Jury he was 17 at the time of the Bunkerville Protest. He also told them he was invited by Flynn. The Prosecution began by showing short video clips taken from Ellis and Flynn's footage which they used for him to identify the Defendants. Ellis also testified that as the Protestors waited for Sheriff Gillespie to some to the stage the crowd sang songs and read poetry. The Defense objected to the footage being shown since it was not from Ellis' camera. Judge Navarro told the Defense, "there is no rule that a person has to be the person who took the video, it just has to be a fair and accurate representation". The Defense then objected to the voice of Flynn saying, "they are going to take the cattle by force. They are going to shut down the freeway"! An obvious attempt to frame the Protest in a negative light. The Judge overruled the objection and another video clip is played. The video played for the Jury was a third party video in which Ellis and Flynn are both seen in the footage. It is presumed to be Dennis Michael Lynch's footage of Cliven and the Protestors singing and praying before Gillespie shows up on scene, not giving credit as to who shot the video. The Prosecution is trying to make a point with several video clips from different sources not distinguishing them from each other in front of the Jury. Ellis was asked about who was present at the stage event? Ellis told the Jury he thought some were Oathkeepers, that he didn't know where they came from or where they went. The Prosecution then presented him a map of the wash, he pointed out where there was parking and a list of other things. The Defense objected to "foundation and chain of custody". Navarro overruled saying, it was not a fair objection. Another video clip was played where Todd Engel is walking down the freeway hoping the Jury will associate the Defendants with someone who has already been convicted in the case. As in the last trial there was a lighthearted moment when the Prosecution played a clip of Flynn's video in which he could be heard saying, "there are kids armed in the wash! Oh! Wait! He has a beard". The Jury laughed as they did last trial, but the courtroom observers had heard it all before. The Prosecution again played Flynn's impromptu interview with Eric Parker where Flynn tries to get a reaction out of the Protestors saying, "there are kids down there! How do you feel about kids being down there"? Flynn was harassing older women with these questions when Parker decided to deflect Flynn's "flamethrower" towards himself, volunteering to be interviewed, in which he said in part, "it's a good thing women and children are down there! It may be the only thing that prevents anyone from being killed"! Concluding with, "it was a great thing. It should continue to happen. There is a rancher in Texas where the government is trying to take 30,000 acres of his land. Go down to Texas! Get on a bridge! Show'em force". Although Parker's explanation of "show of force" was not allowed in from the last trial, the Defense will try again.
Other observations in court today. There have been 13 side bars in two days! So, the Jury is getting their sugar high as they snack on their complementary bowl of candy provided by the Judge. A more thorough description of the newly posted sign about water bottle restrictions included "the right for the court officials to allow certain individuals to be exempt from their restrictions". The courtroom observers say the VET in the wheelchair was not harassed before the second session of court today, and they commend the US Marshall's for making a course correction there. An un-named individual was "kicked out" of the courtroom today, as during a side bar there was observers trying to figure out who was who in the Jury, so Judge Navarro told the person she was not allowed back into the courtroom because she was "too animated" and your are out for the remainder of the trial. Time to get a disguise!
An update on Todd Engel's situation. He entered a Motion to the court to, once again, fire the council appointed by the court and grant him an extension for his sentencing which is scheduled for July 27, 2017. If you remember from last trial, Todd fired his court appointed slacker of an Attorney. He asked to represent himself, which the Judge allowed, but reassigned him his fired Attorney as standby council. Engel is asking the court dismiss the Attorney as he has not assisted him in his defense or subsequent court proceedings. This is the Attorney who missed many of the court proceedings telling Engel he had more important things to do. Playing on his computer during the trial. Falling asleep multiple times during proceedings. Engel is seeking a replacement who has a mind for investigation and an advocate for Liberty to represent him going forward. Please make contact through Rodger Roots, family members or other individuals and groups if you want to help or know someone who will. Please share this information with others as the Mainstream Media, Google and their partners are doing their best to censor this information about the number one story in America in 2014. Thanks for checking in! Until next time when we expect Alex Ellis to be cross examined.
After a break for lunch, Bureau of Land Management Special Agent Adam Sully, who served as a Ranger previously. Agent Sully went undercover and was infiltrating the Bundy family and their supporters. Agent Sully helped in erecting the large posts where banners were flown such as the "Liberty Freedom For God We Stand". It is clear that by him doing this long before April 12, 2014 he was instrumental in the governments plan to entrap the Bundy Family, no holds barred! Sully took several photos while masquerading as part of the support group, which included photos of Ryan Payne, Ricky Lovelien, Jim Laurdy and the Bundy's. Agent Sully's assignment was to identify "these people". Sully testified that he "saw Mel Bundy speak with Ryan Payne as he said, 'some militia would not come until an event took place'". Sully also witnessed Mel talking to "another guy". Mel asked the man if he was part of the militia? To which the man replied "no". Mel told the man there were to separate camps, one for the militia and a general camp. Sully went in to information having to do with a man James/Jim Laudry (sp?), who identified Ricky Lovelien from a photo presented to him. This was the only bit of information the reporter gave concerning Laurdy at this point. The Sully went in to talking about a "J.T." and how he told him about the "militia camp" and how "that's where the important decisions are made. He had better weapons than the BLM and a vehicle full of ammo"! Sully told the Jury that he was sent there to go "undercover" at "these events/rallies" just to talk to people and see if "anyone" had made a plan to "interfere". This concluded his testimony.
 |
| Raising the Banner Posts |
 |
| Posts Erect |
 |
| Banner & Flag Flying On Posts |
Shawn Perez began cross examination of BLM Special Agent Sully with making a statement, "so this J.T. whomever he is, said, 'important decisions would be made at the militia camp' instead of this hippy camp" which brought objections from the Prosecution. It was sustained and Perez got Agent Sully to admit he didn't know who J.T. was.
Richard Tanasi approached the witness and said, "you were presented photos of Ricky, Ryan and the Bundy's, but you were not given photos of Steven Stewart"? To which Agent Sully gave the answer most used by government employees when being questioned, "I don't recall". Dan Love would be proud. Agent Sully responded the same when asked about Eric Parker and Scott Drexler. Agent Sully was next asked about helicopters being used by Law Enforcement on the 11th of April 2014. Sully responded "he did not recall helicopters being used that day". Sully was asked how many times he met with the US Attorney's Office? Sully responded, "3-4 times". He also met with the FBI twice where they went through possible cross examination questions.
Todd Leventhal was up next to question the witness asking Sully, "were you ever undercover in an event other than this"? Responding, "yes". Leventhal questioned Sully about a "sign" he was photographed holding, but that drew objection from the Prosecution that was sustained. Leventhal then asked Sully about a large group of media there. Sully didn't know what they were doing there. Leventhal asked several questions about "J.T." but they were not shared during this report.
Up next was the portion of proceedings in which Judge Gloria Navarro has asked the Jury to submit the questions they would like answered, they are the following. First question, "prior to April 11, 2014 have you been undercover"? BLM Special Agent Sully responded, "yes". Second question, "how many people were at the rally on April 7, 2014"? Agent Sully responded "around 200". Next question, "can you describe the difference between the different militias? Is their clothing different, or any other identifying features to differentiate from the Arizona Militia, the Montana Militia"? Agent Sully said, "no, I was not given that type of information". Next, "did your conversation between you and J.T. give you a reason to look into him more considering his comment about the ammo"? Sully responded, "no, we were not familiar with him and he decided not to look into it. It wasn't my choice to look into it". J.T. could be just another informant or didn't fit into the governments "box", so he dropped it. Next question, "what were you wearing"? Sully answered, "Wranglers, boots, cowboy hat". He was then asked "did you carry a firearm"? To which he responded, "I was not, or didn't think so". The Jury then asked Agent Sully "what vehicle did you drive"? Sully told the Jury, "the first time, it was an unmarked rental and, possibly, a Dodge pickup the second time". Next question, "how can the statements of an unknown individual "J.T." impact the Defendants"? The reporter fails to give the answer to this one. The next question from the Jury, "can the general camp and the militia camp be marked on a map"? The court was recessed for a short time while they located a map and marked the camps for presentation to the Jury.
Richard Tanasi went into some re-direct after the Jury questions by asking Special Agent Sully, "at the height of the media presence, how many supporters were there"? To which he answered, "about 200". This completed testimony by FBI Special Agent Adam Sully.
Next witness for the Prosecution was Alex Ellis who was there with coworker Michael Flynn documenting the Protest on film. Both were from Utah. Since Flynn is now deceased, Ellis is the Prosecutions was of getting Flynn's video submitted into evidence, although he is not an eyewitness to video Flynn was present for. Each took separate video. Ellis and Flynn used tactics in their reporting that consisted of inflammatory language in order to get a the intended response. Alex Ellis told the Jury he was 17 at the time of the Bunkerville Protest. He also told them he was invited by Flynn. The Prosecution began by showing short video clips taken from Ellis and Flynn's footage which they used for him to identify the Defendants. Ellis also testified that as the Protestors waited for Sheriff Gillespie to some to the stage the crowd sang songs and read poetry. The Defense objected to the footage being shown since it was not from Ellis' camera. Judge Navarro told the Defense, "there is no rule that a person has to be the person who took the video, it just has to be a fair and accurate representation". The Defense then objected to the voice of Flynn saying, "they are going to take the cattle by force. They are going to shut down the freeway"! An obvious attempt to frame the Protest in a negative light. The Judge overruled the objection and another video clip is played. The video played for the Jury was a third party video in which Ellis and Flynn are both seen in the footage. It is presumed to be Dennis Michael Lynch's footage of Cliven and the Protestors singing and praying before Gillespie shows up on scene, not giving credit as to who shot the video. The Prosecution is trying to make a point with several video clips from different sources not distinguishing them from each other in front of the Jury. Ellis was asked about who was present at the stage event? Ellis told the Jury he thought some were Oathkeepers, that he didn't know where they came from or where they went. The Prosecution then presented him a map of the wash, he pointed out where there was parking and a list of other things. The Defense objected to "foundation and chain of custody". Navarro overruled saying, it was not a fair objection. Another video clip was played where Todd Engel is walking down the freeway hoping the Jury will associate the Defendants with someone who has already been convicted in the case. As in the last trial there was a lighthearted moment when the Prosecution played a clip of Flynn's video in which he could be heard saying, "there are kids armed in the wash! Oh! Wait! He has a beard". The Jury laughed as they did last trial, but the courtroom observers had heard it all before. The Prosecution again played Flynn's impromptu interview with Eric Parker where Flynn tries to get a reaction out of the Protestors saying, "there are kids down there! How do you feel about kids being down there"? Flynn was harassing older women with these questions when Parker decided to deflect Flynn's "flamethrower" towards himself, volunteering to be interviewed, in which he said in part, "it's a good thing women and children are down there! It may be the only thing that prevents anyone from being killed"! Concluding with, "it was a great thing. It should continue to happen. There is a rancher in Texas where the government is trying to take 30,000 acres of his land. Go down to Texas! Get on a bridge! Show'em force". Although Parker's explanation of "show of force" was not allowed in from the last trial, the Defense will try again.
Other observations in court today. There have been 13 side bars in two days! So, the Jury is getting their sugar high as they snack on their complementary bowl of candy provided by the Judge. A more thorough description of the newly posted sign about water bottle restrictions included "the right for the court officials to allow certain individuals to be exempt from their restrictions". The courtroom observers say the VET in the wheelchair was not harassed before the second session of court today, and they commend the US Marshall's for making a course correction there. An un-named individual was "kicked out" of the courtroom today, as during a side bar there was observers trying to figure out who was who in the Jury, so Judge Navarro told the person she was not allowed back into the courtroom because she was "too animated" and your are out for the remainder of the trial. Time to get a disguise!
An update on Todd Engel's situation. He entered a Motion to the court to, once again, fire the council appointed by the court and grant him an extension for his sentencing which is scheduled for July 27, 2017. If you remember from last trial, Todd fired his court appointed slacker of an Attorney. He asked to represent himself, which the Judge allowed, but reassigned him his fired Attorney as standby council. Engel is asking the court dismiss the Attorney as he has not assisted him in his defense or subsequent court proceedings. This is the Attorney who missed many of the court proceedings telling Engel he had more important things to do. Playing on his computer during the trial. Falling asleep multiple times during proceedings. Engel is seeking a replacement who has a mind for investigation and an advocate for Liberty to represent him going forward. Please make contact through Rodger Roots, family members or other individuals and groups if you want to help or know someone who will. Please share this information with others as the Mainstream Media, Google and their partners are doing their best to censor this information about the number one story in America in 2014. Thanks for checking in! Until next time when we expect Alex Ellis to be cross examined.
July 18, 2017
We start off the day with Juror #16 was dismissed today because there was a death in the family. As this is only the second day of trial, the Marshall's are stepping up their harassment of the Courtroom Observers. Although these government types are obsessed with rules, they continue to make up rules as they go along just to see how obedient the "masses" are. Today's harassment included forbidding the attendees from bringing in water bottles over 20 oz. even though they sell Smart Water in the Cafeteria in larger oz. bottles the observers were unable to bring in their bottles newly purchased from downstairs. Those same rules did no apply to the Prosecution and their cohorts though. They brought in whatever they wanted, EVEN the same water bottles that are for sale in the Cafeteria! There is also a Military Veteran who has been coming to observe the trial. He has to use a wheelchair. The US Marshall's are requiring the man to get up our of his wheelchair and walk through the security checkpoint refusing to assist him in any way. Observers say the man truly has a problem as he had to catch himself on the security uprights several times to keep from falling! Others wanted to assist him, but the US Marshall's refused to let others do so. There may be a lawsuit coming, as this may be violating the American's With Disabilities Act, administered by the DOJ mind you!
On the stand today is FBI Agent Seyler. Agent Seyler verified the warrants for Ryan Payne's personal facebook page also, Operation Mutual Aid facebook page (Ryan Payne Admin.). And facebook pages of Cheyenne Miller (sister of Ricky Lovelien), Carol Bundy, Bundy Ranch to name a few. There was a lot of information divulged on warrants and facebook. The Prosecution moved forward with their agenda of putting Ryan Payne on trial, although he is not included in this group of defendants. While presenting posts from Carol Bundy's facebook page it clearly stated that "we would like our stand of freedom and liberty to remain peaceful". The Prosecution presented facebook dialog between several individuals that made contact with Ryan Payne including, FBI Informant Mark Kessler, Michael Riley. The Defense objected throughout the presentation of evidence gathered by Seyler but Judge Gloria Navarro overruled all of them claiming, "this is in conjunction with the UN-indigted co-conspirators", a derogatory term the Judge and Prosecution are using to label any American that touches any of the defendants in the trial, social media and email being the avenue leading to being indited at any time the DOJ decides to go after you! The Prosecution really starts to turn up the heat on Ricky Lovelien, BUT THEY HAVE NO EVIDENCE! They are using information on Ryan Payne to try to convict Ricky Lovelien, since he basically flew under the radar last trial. There was no evidence then, and there is none now! The information gathered by Seyler on Lovelien included facebook "Likes", "Friending" and "Shares". He became friends with Ryan Payne on April 7, 2014, DAYS before the Protest on the bridge on April 12, 2014, suggesting that at that time, he became the leader under Ryan Payne. Lovelien did make a post that said he would "be helping out with security" on April 11, 2014 and that, the government says, is when he entered into the conspiracy against the government. The Prosecution entered into evidence a post from 2013 were Lovelien signed up for information from the Montana State Defense Force a whole year before the protest in 2014 in Bunkerville (which in mentioned on a forum thread but who's web page I am unable to find). The Prosecution and Agent Seyler continue to bring into evidence email lists from Payne's project pages and websites, which carry over 300 names of individuals who signed up for emails and newsletters. The only link to Lovelien, his name appears on them. The Prosecution can not establish that he opened them, read them or responded to them. Guilt by association!
The Defense voiced objection to the information that was presented trying to link Lovelien to Payne in this paper trial stating, "no conspiracy has been established, not even in the previous trial". It was overruled because, "the government was going to prove the conspiracy". Judge Navarro saying, "I'm already convinced with the evidence brought in thus far but, the Jury is the one who has to decide if a conspiracy exists". The Prosecution are using the term "confrontation" when referencing the people gather to Protest and the Defense stood to object. While arguing Erin Creegan (Prosecutor for Nevada DOJ) stated, "I think confrontation is a very neutral word for it". Judge then giggled and overruled the objection. Throughout the proceedings, the Prosecution continually uses the word militia trying to associate negative connotation to it. In one of the videos Ryan Payne was in that was played in court today, Ryan was heard to have said, "I want everyone to leave here safely". Observers say there was a lot of focus on Cheyenne Miller, but didn't give details. Lovelien was the main focus as the Prosecution entered into evidence photo/video evidence of Lovelien with his firearm asking Seyler, "do you see his hand on the firearm"? Observers say it was not obvious IF he had his hand on the firearm, but he may have just had his hand on his hip or in close proximity to the firearm. The Prosecution then enters facebook photos from 2013 of Lovelien in winter camo with his firearm and two other photos of just his firearm. It being not unusual to people who live in the West to often go hunting in all types of weather, but they are trying to paint a picture of Lovelien as a "camo wearing radical gun-lover". This is why a Jury Of Your Peers is so important! It should be people like you. Who do the same things you do. Who live where you live!
As court resumed after lunch the US Marshalls were, again, harassing the VET in the wheelchair. He was made to stand up and walk through the security apparatus UN-assited, being gruff with the man saying, "try to step through it without touching it"! Once again, violating their own rules of the ADA!
Court continued with FBI Agent Seller (?) on the stand resuming his evidence via "facebook warrant" of Ryan Payne, Ricky Lovelien, Carol Bundy, also, phone records of Cliven Bundy, Eric Parker, Ricky Lovelien and Ryan Payne and Todd Engel. They begin by entering into evidence a photo of Todd Engel crouched down with Ricky Lovelien behind him. They then go into phone records of Ricky to Ryan Payne, calls lasting :37, :36, 1:11, 6:33, :38, 7:37. This was all displayed in a timeline the government created in which is displayed Ricky calls Ryan, then Ricky calls Nick Whiting, then two other individuals. All of these calls where no longer than a minute, but could be less because these phone calls are rounded up. Ricky then received phone calls from Randy Eaton, James Lardy (?sp). Ricky then makes a call to Cheyenne Miller. This is all claimed to be "recruiting" on the part of Payne and Lovelien. Next, Ryan Payne calls Cliven Bundy's home and cell phone on April 7, 2014. The evidence presented did not have time stamps, so it is speculation en lieu of hard evidence the Jury will be left to discern. Courtroom observers keen eyes noticed that these calls only lasted :36 and :37, only because they were paying attention to the information displayed on the slides that was not present on the timeline created by the government. Next evidence is entered of a phone call between Ryan and Ricky that lasted 6:33. Agent Seller says that 20 minutes later Lovelien "puts out a call" for people to go to Bundy Ranch, I am assuming this was a facebook post not an actual phone call. A few minutes after his post, Ricky "Liked" the Operation Mutual Aid (OMA) Page. Payne then calls Ricky, followed by Cliven. Then Carol issued a "public statement" on facebook. the context of which was not relayed. Cheyenne Miller was then brought into the picture. Aprarantly Cheyenne received a bulk email from the OMA group and they are using this, because she is Lovelien's sister, to link him to "the conspiracy". Most people never look at those things in any consistency.
The Prosecution tries once more to enter into evidence Ricky Lovelien's booking photos. The Defense objected. This initiated a side bar, and after discussion only one photo was allowed. The photo was described to have been Lovelien's lower body in waist shackles showing a lower arm tattoo. The Prosecution proceeded to have Seller read the testimony of Eric Parker's cross examination from the last trial, which included a lot of "no sir, yes sir". It was really hit and miss quotes from the following pages 138 and read a line, then 146 read a line, and this continues with pages 148, 149, 163 jumping back to page 45. There tactic seems to be to try to make Parker look unreliable and inconsistent saying that Parker is lying about the time he arrived at Bundy Rand because in one instance he said he arrived at between 12:30 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. and in another instance he said 2:00 a.m. The point is he arrived in the middle of the night, actually early morning on April 12, 2014 and was there less than 24 hours! The Defense objected to the way the evidence was presented sighting, "incomplete", stating they wanted the testimony replayed in it's entirety. The Judge overruled the objection. The Prosecution continued to paint a picture of Eric Parker as a "gun toting, gas mask carrying lunatic". The Defense stood to object when the Prosecution read a line of Parker's testimony that had the words "show of force". This resulted in another side bar, and then another, while the Prosecution goes on reading portions of Parker's testimony from the "mistrial".
Shawn Perez was first up for the Defense challenging the mass email message sent out by Ryan Payne's organization OMA/OMD. Perez asked for proof that Ricky Lovelien received the email or opened the email. Perez pressed Seyler to admit he doesn't have proof Lovelien opened it. The witness continues to skirt the issue without confirming the fact. Perez is trying to get him to confess it's because Seyler sat in on the last trial and was privy to the evidence presented by all the witnesses by the Prosecution that he is trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill!
There were other shenanigans in court today! Apparently Juror #4 has been falling asleep multiple times during the proceedings. The US Marshall and Richard Tanasi (Defense) witnessed this behavior with Tanasi going so far as to write down the times/duration of the episodes. Juror #4 is one of the Jurors that was eliminated by the Defense in the original Jury Selection Process, but Judge Gloria Navarro reinstated sighting "Defense Bias". This is apparently the second time they have had to have a discussion about Juror #4. Juror #4 admitted to falling asleep when brought before the court. He gave a list of excuses to justify his behavior, the Judge allowing him to stay put. A claim was also made by the Prosecution that Steven Stewart mouthed something two separate times to the Jury during the session and threatened to put him in "the cell" for the duration. Judge Navarro's outlandish behavior is ever present in the courtroom. Ever on display for the Jury to see. Laughing. Giggling. Slamming her hands on her podium. Yelling "side bar". Trying to control the narrative by using inflammatory language to demonize, including her 17 references to the Defendants as UN-indited Co-conspirators, and her overruling all 37 objections from the Defense. Until tomorrow.
July 17, 2017
Opening statements began today. Before they began Jess Marchese (Attorney for Eric Parker), entered an objection stating, "I want it on the record I object to to "makeup" of the Jury", as Judge Gloria Navarro reinstated 5 of the Jurists the Defense had dismissed previously. Richard Tanasi (Attorney for Steven Stewart), also entered an objection as to a slide show that was going to be shown by the Prosecution Team stating, "no evidence has been introduced at this time". Judge Navarro responded stating, "exhibits have always been used during opening statements", asking, "is there something in particular you are objecting to"? Tanasi responded he was objecting to the 36 slides the Prosecution intended on showing. Judge Navarro never gave a ruling, and just told them to proceed. The Prosecution was allowed to use the 36 slides as evidence. Marchese voiced an objection to the slide presentation because they don't know who will be included in the slides and won't know if they will be able to show up for testimony presenting their defense. Judge Navarro overruled the objection. The Prosecution then objected to 1 photo the Defense wanted to present to the Jury during opening statements of the "stacked formation" of the National Parks Service in full "battle rattle" ready to fire upon the protestors. Judge Navarro takes this as a sign that Steven Stewart would be testifying. Tanasi answered, "at this time I do no need to say", Judge Navarro warns him that he may be bringing evidence before the jury that may not be addressed later in trial. Tanasi explains that, "we are going into Bureau Of Land Management conduct and Law Enforcement conduct". Jess Marchese stands and says, "this applies to the self defense aspect of the case and we will be entering evidence to prove that". Judge Navarro responds, "self defense does not include agents of Law Enforcement, it is not relevant and there is no evidence of extreme force that was used by the agents". Marchese continued, "what we are trying to show is what actually happened in the wash". Navarro responded, "it is not a legal defense and what you are arguing is Jury Nullification. I know the facts of this case. I was here last time. This is not a legal defense"! Navarro then proceeds to give the following example. "If a man walks into a bank with the intent to rob it, a security guard pulls a gun out to point it at him, and that man points a gun back at the security guard, that is NOT self defense"! Continuing, "if you want to argue the facts, then argue the facts! This is not a legal defense here, so we're done with this"! Concluding, "you can now bring the Jury in, and you can not use the photo"!
The Jury was led into the courtroom, and the Prosecution began with Steven Myhre (District of Nevada Prosecuting Attorney) stating, "this case has to do with April 12, 2014 and not much else. The charges in this case stem from April 12, 2014 between 12:00 p.m. to 12:40 p.m. and the actions of these gentlemen on the wash, and their actions alone"! Myhre continued, "these men went on a bridge and threatened to shoot Law Enforcement Officers. They proved they were willing to shoot them to get the officers to stop! They traveled to intimidate officers, and Law Enforcement Officers were MADE to back down"! Myhre listed all the charges and told the Jury how the defendants were "pointing guns" (Eric Parker and Scott Drexler), "brandishing a weapon" (Steven Stewart) and "carrying a weapon" (Ricky Lovelien), as they clicked threw their sideshow of photos. Myhre continued, "it's not exactly what they did, it's the mindset behind the gun. The mindset behind the person wielding the gun".
It is important to note here that the Judge has forbidden the Defense from talking about "the state of mind" of the Defendants and prevented them from bringing before the Jury evidence of their state of mind. The following documents were filed in court before Jury selection began outlining the EVIDENCE the Defense would be barred from presenting.
The Prosecution continued listing the charges and indicating who is implicated in them along with photos in their slide show of what they are saying is incriminating evidence of conspiracy, obstructing justice, force and violence against Law Enforcement saying, "they were willing to work together and conspire together, to stop the Law Enforcement Officers. To be in a conspiracy, you merely need a wink and a nod! There does not need to be an agreement, not even a verbal agreement, just being there signals conspiracy". The Defense objected to this theory and Judge Gloria Navarro overruled the objections stating, "it is a correct interpretation of the law". Here is a list of the charges and penalties the government is seeking.
The Prosecution moved forward with their opening arguments introducing evidence in regards to Ryan Payne (who is not a defendant in this trial of 4) and his association with Operation Mutual Aid (the website is now frozen, but here is a link to their facebook page). The Prosecution told the Jury that Ryan Payne used this organization to build "his militia" and to move against the Federal Government, which he has always wanted to do. Courtroom observers say the Prosecution are framing the picture that Ryan Payne was the leader of the conspiracy, and that Ammon and Cliven Bundy are victims. The Prosecution continued by telling the Jury Ryan Payne used the group to use force against the government and, "Bundy was just a way for him to do this, they were acting on another matter entirely". Myhre continued to paint a picture were Ryan Payne reached out to Ricky Lovelien for a "call to arms", therefore Ricky Lovelien is a "leader". Myhre continued, they traveled to Nevada, they camped with the militia, rode to the bridge together, and even though the others didn't know Ricky Lovelien, by interacting with him, they, at that point, entered into a conspiracy together, although they didn't even know each others names until they were arrested. The Prosecution told the Jury, "people who came to Bunkerville with signs are Protestors, people who came with guns are Militia. Myhre presented evidence of the rally miles away from the bridge and told the Jury the BLM set up a "police station". Myhre spoke of how the Sheriff had to get involved saying, "emotions mixed with guns in never a good mixture". The Jury was told that the Sheriff wanted to meet privately with Cliven Bundy, but that Cliven didn't want a private meeting seeing the outpouring of support from the people, and how Cliven asked him to speak to the people on the stage stating, "I have come to make an emotional situation safe" also telling them, "the BLM operation is being seized and they are removing their assets". The Jury was told that Cliven asked about the cattle and Sheriff Doug Gillespie said, "that is what we need to talk about". Myhre then said that Cliven got up on stage and amped up the crowd creating a mass of emotion in the people to go down and take the cattle back and to, "disarm the BLM and the NPS and take down the pay stations at Lake Mead and Red Rock, giving them 1 hour to accomplish that task, while after that the crowd shouted "do your job"! Myhre tried to paint a picture that the people were against the Sheriff (video evidence shows the people were in favor of the Sheriff showing up). Myhre continued, "100's of people got into their vehicles and drove to the wash". He continued to present the evidence in the last trial to the jury in a step by step motion. Myhre told the Jury that Las Vegas Metro set up an early response post in order to respond to any call for assistance at the wash even though the protest moving to the wash was not pre-planned. Myhre painted a picture that the BLM/Las Vegas Metro/Sheriff's Office were working together on the skirmish line, (although evidence in the last trial proved this was not true). The Prosecution tried to show that the four men were using a show of force just by bringing a weapon.
During opening arguments the Prosecution told the Jury Eric Parker planned his visit to Nevada 6 months prior to April 12, 2014, when the truth is he and the other three men spent less than 24 hours in Nevada the day the cows came home. The Prosecution also used Eric Parker's testimony from the first trial to tell the Jury that Parker's testimony about Jury Nullification is not a defense, and that self defense and defense of others is not a legal defense. Parker's testimony included the fact that he did not get down behind the cement barrier on the bridge even when the BLM told the crowd over the loud speaker they were going to "deploy pepper gas into the crowd". It wasn't until he next heard the BLM say "they were now authorized to use deadly force/lethal force" upon the people. Parker knew he had snipers aiming at him, it was then he got down to defend himself and the people down within the wash he believed were going to be slaughtered like they did at Ruby Ridge.
Courtroom observers verify that during this trial Ricky Lovelien is being hit hard, since they have absolutely no evidence against him, and if you are familiar with the last trial, he was basically a fly on the wall, hardly being mentioned. The Prosecution is using any evidence in conjunction with Ryan Payne to implicate Ricky, not only as a conspirator, but as a "co-leader" of the conspiracy. In other words, guilt by association! Using facebook and website newsletters via email as their evidence. The Prosecution told the Jury that because Lovelien saw a post on facebook, "liked it" and "shared it" and asked where to go, went to the wash, made a phone call and gave Steve, Scott and Eric a ride to the stage and the bridge makes him a leader. The Prosecution then rested.
Shawn Perez (Attorney for Ricky Lovelien) began the opening statement for the Defense reminding the Jury that opening statements are not evidence. Perez told the Jury that the government has stated there were 400 people, give or take, not thousands of Protestors. That, "no shots were fired, not even a rock was thrown and no one was arrested that day. They all went home". Perez continued saying, "on April 11, 2014 the BLM said they were going to cease operations". Yet the Las Vegas Metro set up stations around the IPC (BLM Command Center) protecting them NOT the Protestors. Stating, while the government wants to try to demonize the militia, "the purpose of the militia is not to create violence, but to prevent it".
Richard Tanasi (Attorney for Steven Stewart) was next up for the Defense telling the Jury, "there was a plan, a plan to protest. A plan to stand up to the Federal Government. They had weapons. They are not charged with simply having weapons because it is not illegal". Continuing, "on April 11, 2014 the BLM were ceasing operations even before Steven, Scott and Eric got into their car and got down there. Steven believed the the operation was over and he was going to go watch the cows come home. Free cows! Coming down the wash, coming back to the ranch in celebration. What they saw when they got there was BLM/NPS dressed like Military". This point drew objection from the Prosecution which was sustained. Tanasi continued, "this is not a new concept. This is how our country was founded". Tanasi outlined for the Jury our founding and how it was formed by protesting forces that tried to take away our inalienable rights, taking away the rights of civilians all in the name of big business and money.
After the break for lunch Todd Leventhal (Attorney for Scott Drexler) presented his opening statement saying, "what I want to tell you is, there are no Bundy's in this case. There are three parts to this so called 'Bundy Case', one is the Bundy's, two is the militia, and what we have here is these guys. You will hear about the Bundy's court orders. Not one of these guys know about it. Not one of these guys that were here in 2014 was in a militia. An email went out from Ryan Payne. It went out to over 300 people. Not one of those 300 people were Eric Parker, Steven Stewart or Scott Drexler", admonishing the Jury to please look hard at the evidence to make sure that it links them to the defendants and the defendants alone. Leventhal told the Jury, "there is a back story. Scott Drexler saw movie's and images that made him go to Nevada and a place that he had never heard of, Bunkerville. Stating, "he did not come for cows. He didn't care about the cows"! Leventhal continued, "Scott got to Nevada on the 12th of April 2014, where he went to hear the speech, where the Sheriff said, 'the BLM are ceasing operations and re-opening the Gold Butte Allotment'. Leventhal then displayed a photo of the Protestors engaged in prayer saying, "they were the first to arrive in the wash", also pointing out to the Jury there was no one on the bridge or the abutment at that time. Leventhal circles a man in a blue shirt in the photo and tells the Jury it is Dennis Michael Lynch recording the events down in the wash with the BLM. Leventhal tells the Jury, "Lynch will be here to testify for the Defense to the fact that he said on film to the BLM, 'are you really going to shoot these people'? . This brought objections from the Prosecution. This initiated a side bar that lasted at least 30 minutes, all the while the observers and the Jury had to sit and wait. Leventhal was told not to speak of that at all, and it is requested that it be stricken from the record. Leventhal was then able to continue stating, "this was a complete disorganized mess"! He told the Jury they would here the BLM testify that they were scared saying, "in the thousands and thousands of photos and videos presented, look for the guns pointing at the people. Look at the officers. Do they look scared? When you see the evidence, look for evidence that supports these things. Emphasizing, "the government is putting a protest on trial here"! Leventhal tells the Jury Scott is 47 with a beautiful daughter and a grandson stating, "he's a regular American". The Defense concluded opening statements and the testimony began with the governments first witness Sheriff Joseph Lombardo who was under-Sheriff at the time of the Protest at Bunkerville.
The Prosecution began by having Sheriff Lombardo tell about his previous responsibilities within the Sheriff's Department. Lombardo states he has been with Las Vegas Metro/Clark County Sheriff's Department since 1988. Lombardo also states, "I went to Bunkerville for protection of the Sheriff while he visited with Cliven Bundy, and to tell Cliven "the BLM had a cease and desist". Sheriff Lombardo said when they got to the stage there were 200 - 300 people. He testified that the people at the stage area were calm, and Cliven arrived at the stage with a caravan with trucks in front and behind his HumV full of militia wearing camo. Lambardo said he heard Cliven say, "I will talk to you on stage", and that after the Sheriff spoke there was "rejoicing from the crowd", but after Cliven spoke the crowd displayed anger. Lombardo testified that the men in camo were security for Cliven and his speech was "unrealistic". He also said the crowd felt no fear from Law Enforcement. Lombardo also testified that when the Sheriff exited the stage, that's when the cowboy's arrived and, "they had rifles" and that the four people from the Sheriff's Department were outnumbered. After the crowd dispersed Lombardo said he was given command of Las Vegas Metro at the ICP,, where he went immediately, but was not given authority over the BLM. Lombardo testified to setting up the skirmish line and the snipers. He said the group continued to grow in size and that they were under staffed because of the amount of people and that "they had firearms, and the officers did not have adequate gear to ward them off"! Lombardo said he tried to find an informed leader, walking around trying to find Dave Bundy to ask about "his intent", to which Dave stated, "I am here to get the cattle". Lombardo told Dave to control the crowd. Dave told Lombardo, "I cannot control the crowd. You have an hour to figure this out with the cattle". Lombardo responded, "I need eight hours to several days", saying, "the situation was dire because people were moving toward the gate", although Lombardo and Dave had their conversation on the other side of the street in the parking area were he would not have been able to see the skirmish line. Lombardo then told the Jury he gave the order for the BLM to release the cattle because he didn't know if the BLM's training or experience was adequate in a group setting and if "accidental fire" had happened there would be bloodshed stating, "I would need 500 Officers to control the situation". It the last trial it was established that only 47 guns were had in a crowd of 300 Protestors. The Protestors were already outnumbered! Lombardo goes on to tell the Jury the crowd was not afraid of the Police Officers. They were welcoming them, telling them, "we have actual Law Enforcement to put the BLM in check". Lombardo said that because he wasn't confident in the BLM's ability in crowd control he wanted to "get them out of there first".
At this point a video was played of Lombardo, Daniel P. Love, Ryan and Dave Bundy. The video shows Dan Love saying, "I cannot release the cattle. It is against the law and I can not approve you releasing the cattle". Dan Love goes on to give Ryan and Dave a warning about releasing the cattle telling them, "you could be arrested at a later time". The point of Dan Love saying this to Ryan and Dave is to have them implicate themselves in a crime. In the video portion I have seen, Dan Love not only tells Ryan and Dave, but in another clip tells Ammon, "Cliven or his sons need to pull the pin on this gate". This is what Dan wanted to have happen in order to take action against the Bundy's and the Protestors. He wanted a showdown! As testimony with Lombardo continued he said, "the decision to release the cattle was in direct correlation to the amount of supporters were there".
The Prosecution entered into evidence and exhibit of a SWAT Officer in standard gear asking Lombardo, "is this standard gear for BLM agents"? Responding, "I can not testify to that, I can only testify to Metro". Lombardo then testified that the BLM left the area and the cattle were released. The Prosecution asked, "were you concerned for safety when the cattle were released"? Stating, "yes, and I was there for over 5 hours".
Cross examination began with Richard Tanasi asking about men with radios and men in "quasi camo gear". Tanasi asked Lombardo if he saw Parker, Drexler, Stewart or Lovelien there, to which he responded, "no, I cannot testify to that". Tanasi then brought up the subject of the SWAT gear which drew objections and resulted in another lengthy side bar with the Jury and observers being held in limbo. The side bars taking place at this trial differ from the last trial as last trial the Jury and the observers were privy to the discussion, this time, they are having these discussions in private. After the 30 minute side bar Tanasi asked Lobmardo, "so you decided to have SWAT regress"? Lombardo responded, "no, they were there to protect the inner perimeter". Tanasi asked, "they have different levels of gear than regular Police"? The Prosecution objected to that and it was sustained. Tanasi again asks, "so you had SWAT regress"? Lombardo again responds, "no". Tanasi then asks him if he can show him his prior testimony? Will that refresh your memory"? Lombardo responding, "no it wouldn't". Tanasi proceeded to show him his prior testimony where he testified twice to the statement he told the SWAT Team to regress because he didn't want to have the treat level increase because there were people out there in SWAT gear. "That is why I did not have the Metro Officers put on their vests they carried in their vehicles because they wanted to deescalate the situation, not escalate the situation". Courtroom observers say that this line of questioning was objected to several times and it almost resulted in another one of those side bars. Tanasi continued asking Lombardo, "so no arrests were made? So are the people supposed to fear the Police"? Which drew objections that were sustained.
Next Jess Marchese stepped up asking about Lombardo walking across the street to talk to Dave Bundy about communicating with the Protestors and that communication helped deescalate things. Marchese asked how many times he met with Dave Bundy? He responded, "one time prior". During questioning it was established that an hour and a half before he met with Dave the cattle would be released and that there were 50 minutes before there was body cam footage of the meeting amongst Lombardo, Dan Love, Ryan and Dave Bundy. The Defense tried to bring in to evidence video footage of the skirmish line coming across the street to meet with Dave and they were bared from doing so. Marchese brings up the speech on the stage where Ammon welcomes the Sheriff telling the crowd, "you need to be respectful of the Sheriff because he is an elected official, and we have given him authority over us". At this point the Judge stops Leventhal and says, "why are you playing this video"? Responding to the Judge's question the Defense said, "this is how we've done it in the past. I show the video, then we ask our questions". Judge Navarro said, "no! We've already seen the video, now ask your question, and if he doesn't remember THEN we'll watch the video again". The Defense again addressed the men in camo arriving with Cliven at the stage, how the crowd was calm, but got louder with celebration after Cliven's speech. The Defense described how the BLM was lined up at the gate, "but no Protestors were on the bridge"? To which Lombardo went back and forth saying "yes there were, and no there weren't". Courtroom observers say Lombardo kept trying to skirt this issue and had to be led back to it by the Defense. The Defense said, "Dan Love was in charge of the cattle operation, and you were not, until you decided to take it over". Drawing objections. The Defense continued by asking Lombardo if there was anyone on the other side? "Where was your under-Sheriff"? Lombardo stated they were in between Post 1 and 2. The Defense asked, "was he there to deescalate the situation on the BLM side"? Which drew objections. Judge Navarro said, "I don't see the relevance in the question. There is noting to deescalate on the BLM side". The Defense continued, "so, you weren't confident in the training and experience of the BLM concerning groups and crowds"? Lombardo responded, "yes, because that is not the role of the BLM".
Shawn Perez asked only one question. "Did you see Ricky Lovelien"? The Defense rested, and the Prosecution went forward with re-direct.
The Prosecution said, "so you were asked about accidental discharge". The response, "yes". "What other factors were you concerned about with your officers"? Lombardo responded, "safety, the safety of the Nevada Highway Patrol and the safety of the BLM if there had been a firefight". The Prosecution rested with that.
The Defense was then asked if they wanted a re-direct? To which they responded, "no". Observers say the Judge was not satisfied with that answer so Judge Navarro decided to ask her own questions. She started with, "you say you weren't concerned about accidental discharge, where you ever worried about intentional discharge"? To which Lombardo responded, "yes". Judge Navarro, after successfully rewording the Prosecutions question obtaining a favorable response then asked the Jury, "do you have any questions? Write them down on a piece of paper and hand them in to me. Don't write your Juror number on them". The Judge may have just opened a can of worms, because the Jury had plenty of questions and questions she probably would not have allowed if the Defense had asked them! Here we go! First question, there was a reference made to a prior trial? More of a statement as is was reported upon, but THE JUDGE RESPONDED, "there are different hearing in criminal cases, with multiple testimonies, and we'll just leave it at that"! Second question, "what were the operation before they decided to release? Was the plan to release the cattle or ship them out"? Judge Navarro, once again, answered the question, not the witness saying, "this person can not testify to that. That will be a question to ask later on". Third, the question was asked about the definition of "cease and desist", which drew the response, "that means that they were to stop the operation and stop what they were doing". Next question. "Is there a command relationship between the IPC structure at the present and at the time of 2014"? The Judge tells the Jury, "this witness cannot answer this question so, it will have to be asked later on". Next question was, "did you know if their firearms were loaded"? Lombardo actually got to answer this one. "No! I did not know if their firearms were loaded". Next question, "what was the relationship between the Las Vegas Metro and the Bureau of Land Management"? Lombardo again answered, "the BLM had operational authority that they relinquished when I stepped in to take over. The BLM had incident command structure prior to Metro being there. Lombardo then describes a meeting he attended prior to April 12th indicating he knew about that structure and Soul Laurel (?) was the "main person" and Dan Love was under him, but Dan Love was the incident commander on the day of April 12, 2014. Throughout Lombardo's testimony he kept saying he was in fear for the Las Vegas Metro's lives, the BLM's lives, the Nevada Highway Patrol's lives! Never once did he say he was in fear for The People's lives! Shows you were his priorities lie, heaven forbid you should call them for help! He also repeated several times that, "the people were not afraid of the police" implying that the people should be afraid of the police! Something Lombardo may want to think about is that The People elected him and expect that they will PROTECT THEM! That was the end of the days questions. Court was adjourned.
Courtroom observers say everyone, including the media present, were shocked at what happened in court today! "You have to be here to believe it" they said.
Some facts that have been established after this first day of trial. The Defense will, once again, be denied the evidence the Prosecution plans on presenting. The Defense is without a Defense since they are not allowed by the Judge to tell the Jury WHY they went to Nevada and ended up on the bridge by the wash with the right to defend themselves with their firearms. Whatever was effective in the Defense's case in the previous trial will not be allowed in this trial. Although the Prosecution went through the charges point by point with the Jury, the Defense is not allowed to reference the punishment associated with the charges if the Defendants were to be convicted. The support for the Defendants has lifted their spirits as the courtroom has been packed by observers. The Citizenry are not allowed to dress in camo or have their own private security or they will risk being labeled "quasi military/militia", that being a bad thing! Andrea Parker, wife of Eric Parker, is being singled out by Judge Gloria Navarro and being told if she makes one wtong move she will be bared from the remainder of the trial. Not just a sesson or a day, but the duration of the trial! The Jury is allowed to ask the witnesses questions. In what world does this make any sense? The Prosecution may rat on her on this one. Until next time, farewell.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Let's hope that the Prosecution using "state of mind" terminology in their opening statement before the Jury the Defense will take that opportunity to step through that open door and present their evidence.
The Prosecution continued listing the charges and indicating who is implicated in them along with photos in their slide show of what they are saying is incriminating evidence of conspiracy, obstructing justice, force and violence against Law Enforcement saying, "they were willing to work together and conspire together, to stop the Law Enforcement Officers. To be in a conspiracy, you merely need a wink and a nod! There does not need to be an agreement, not even a verbal agreement, just being there signals conspiracy". The Defense objected to this theory and Judge Gloria Navarro overruled the objections stating, "it is a correct interpretation of the law". Here is a list of the charges and penalties the government is seeking.
- Conspiracy to commit an offense against the U.S.- 5 years, $250,000.00 fine.
- Conspiracy to impede and injure a Federal Law Enforcement Officer- 6 years, $250,000.00 fine.
- Assault on a Federal Law Enforcement Officer- 20 years, $250,000.00 fine.
- Threatening a Federal Law Enforcement Officer- 10 years, $250,000.00 fine.
- Use and carry of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence- 5 years maximum and consecutive.
- Obstruction of the due administration of justice- 10 years, $250,000.00 fine.
- Interference with interstate commerce by extortion- 20 years, $250,000.00 fine.
- Interstate travel in aid of extortion- 20 years, $250,000.00 fine.
The Prosecution moved forward with their opening arguments introducing evidence in regards to Ryan Payne (who is not a defendant in this trial of 4) and his association with Operation Mutual Aid (the website is now frozen, but here is a link to their facebook page). The Prosecution told the Jury that Ryan Payne used this organization to build "his militia" and to move against the Federal Government, which he has always wanted to do. Courtroom observers say the Prosecution are framing the picture that Ryan Payne was the leader of the conspiracy, and that Ammon and Cliven Bundy are victims. The Prosecution continued by telling the Jury Ryan Payne used the group to use force against the government and, "Bundy was just a way for him to do this, they were acting on another matter entirely". Myhre continued to paint a picture were Ryan Payne reached out to Ricky Lovelien for a "call to arms", therefore Ricky Lovelien is a "leader". Myhre continued, they traveled to Nevada, they camped with the militia, rode to the bridge together, and even though the others didn't know Ricky Lovelien, by interacting with him, they, at that point, entered into a conspiracy together, although they didn't even know each others names until they were arrested. The Prosecution told the Jury, "people who came to Bunkerville with signs are Protestors, people who came with guns are Militia. Myhre presented evidence of the rally miles away from the bridge and told the Jury the BLM set up a "police station". Myhre spoke of how the Sheriff had to get involved saying, "emotions mixed with guns in never a good mixture". The Jury was told that the Sheriff wanted to meet privately with Cliven Bundy, but that Cliven didn't want a private meeting seeing the outpouring of support from the people, and how Cliven asked him to speak to the people on the stage stating, "I have come to make an emotional situation safe" also telling them, "the BLM operation is being seized and they are removing their assets". The Jury was told that Cliven asked about the cattle and Sheriff Doug Gillespie said, "that is what we need to talk about". Myhre then said that Cliven got up on stage and amped up the crowd creating a mass of emotion in the people to go down and take the cattle back and to, "disarm the BLM and the NPS and take down the pay stations at Lake Mead and Red Rock, giving them 1 hour to accomplish that task, while after that the crowd shouted "do your job"! Myhre tried to paint a picture that the people were against the Sheriff (video evidence shows the people were in favor of the Sheriff showing up). Myhre continued, "100's of people got into their vehicles and drove to the wash". He continued to present the evidence in the last trial to the jury in a step by step motion. Myhre told the Jury that Las Vegas Metro set up an early response post in order to respond to any call for assistance at the wash even though the protest moving to the wash was not pre-planned. Myhre painted a picture that the BLM/Las Vegas Metro/Sheriff's Office were working together on the skirmish line, (although evidence in the last trial proved this was not true). The Prosecution tried to show that the four men were using a show of force just by bringing a weapon.
During opening arguments the Prosecution told the Jury Eric Parker planned his visit to Nevada 6 months prior to April 12, 2014, when the truth is he and the other three men spent less than 24 hours in Nevada the day the cows came home. The Prosecution also used Eric Parker's testimony from the first trial to tell the Jury that Parker's testimony about Jury Nullification is not a defense, and that self defense and defense of others is not a legal defense. Parker's testimony included the fact that he did not get down behind the cement barrier on the bridge even when the BLM told the crowd over the loud speaker they were going to "deploy pepper gas into the crowd". It wasn't until he next heard the BLM say "they were now authorized to use deadly force/lethal force" upon the people. Parker knew he had snipers aiming at him, it was then he got down to defend himself and the people down within the wash he believed were going to be slaughtered like they did at Ruby Ridge.
Courtroom observers verify that during this trial Ricky Lovelien is being hit hard, since they have absolutely no evidence against him, and if you are familiar with the last trial, he was basically a fly on the wall, hardly being mentioned. The Prosecution is using any evidence in conjunction with Ryan Payne to implicate Ricky, not only as a conspirator, but as a "co-leader" of the conspiracy. In other words, guilt by association! Using facebook and website newsletters via email as their evidence. The Prosecution told the Jury that because Lovelien saw a post on facebook, "liked it" and "shared it" and asked where to go, went to the wash, made a phone call and gave Steve, Scott and Eric a ride to the stage and the bridge makes him a leader. The Prosecution then rested.
Shawn Perez (Attorney for Ricky Lovelien) began the opening statement for the Defense reminding the Jury that opening statements are not evidence. Perez told the Jury that the government has stated there were 400 people, give or take, not thousands of Protestors. That, "no shots were fired, not even a rock was thrown and no one was arrested that day. They all went home". Perez continued saying, "on April 11, 2014 the BLM said they were going to cease operations". Yet the Las Vegas Metro set up stations around the IPC (BLM Command Center) protecting them NOT the Protestors. Stating, while the government wants to try to demonize the militia, "the purpose of the militia is not to create violence, but to prevent it".
Richard Tanasi (Attorney for Steven Stewart) was next up for the Defense telling the Jury, "there was a plan, a plan to protest. A plan to stand up to the Federal Government. They had weapons. They are not charged with simply having weapons because it is not illegal". Continuing, "on April 11, 2014 the BLM were ceasing operations even before Steven, Scott and Eric got into their car and got down there. Steven believed the the operation was over and he was going to go watch the cows come home. Free cows! Coming down the wash, coming back to the ranch in celebration. What they saw when they got there was BLM/NPS dressed like Military". This point drew objection from the Prosecution which was sustained. Tanasi continued, "this is not a new concept. This is how our country was founded". Tanasi outlined for the Jury our founding and how it was formed by protesting forces that tried to take away our inalienable rights, taking away the rights of civilians all in the name of big business and money.
After the break for lunch Todd Leventhal (Attorney for Scott Drexler) presented his opening statement saying, "what I want to tell you is, there are no Bundy's in this case. There are three parts to this so called 'Bundy Case', one is the Bundy's, two is the militia, and what we have here is these guys. You will hear about the Bundy's court orders. Not one of these guys know about it. Not one of these guys that were here in 2014 was in a militia. An email went out from Ryan Payne. It went out to over 300 people. Not one of those 300 people were Eric Parker, Steven Stewart or Scott Drexler", admonishing the Jury to please look hard at the evidence to make sure that it links them to the defendants and the defendants alone. Leventhal told the Jury, "there is a back story. Scott Drexler saw movie's and images that made him go to Nevada and a place that he had never heard of, Bunkerville. Stating, "he did not come for cows. He didn't care about the cows"! Leventhal continued, "Scott got to Nevada on the 12th of April 2014, where he went to hear the speech, where the Sheriff said, 'the BLM are ceasing operations and re-opening the Gold Butte Allotment'. Leventhal then displayed a photo of the Protestors engaged in prayer saying, "they were the first to arrive in the wash", also pointing out to the Jury there was no one on the bridge or the abutment at that time. Leventhal circles a man in a blue shirt in the photo and tells the Jury it is Dennis Michael Lynch recording the events down in the wash with the BLM. Leventhal tells the Jury, "Lynch will be here to testify for the Defense to the fact that he said on film to the BLM, 'are you really going to shoot these people'? . This brought objections from the Prosecution. This initiated a side bar that lasted at least 30 minutes, all the while the observers and the Jury had to sit and wait. Leventhal was told not to speak of that at all, and it is requested that it be stricken from the record. Leventhal was then able to continue stating, "this was a complete disorganized mess"! He told the Jury they would here the BLM testify that they were scared saying, "in the thousands and thousands of photos and videos presented, look for the guns pointing at the people. Look at the officers. Do they look scared? When you see the evidence, look for evidence that supports these things. Emphasizing, "the government is putting a protest on trial here"! Leventhal tells the Jury Scott is 47 with a beautiful daughter and a grandson stating, "he's a regular American". The Defense concluded opening statements and the testimony began with the governments first witness Sheriff Joseph Lombardo who was under-Sheriff at the time of the Protest at Bunkerville.
The Prosecution began by having Sheriff Lombardo tell about his previous responsibilities within the Sheriff's Department. Lombardo states he has been with Las Vegas Metro/Clark County Sheriff's Department since 1988. Lombardo also states, "I went to Bunkerville for protection of the Sheriff while he visited with Cliven Bundy, and to tell Cliven "the BLM had a cease and desist". Sheriff Lombardo said when they got to the stage there were 200 - 300 people. He testified that the people at the stage area were calm, and Cliven arrived at the stage with a caravan with trucks in front and behind his HumV full of militia wearing camo. Lambardo said he heard Cliven say, "I will talk to you on stage", and that after the Sheriff spoke there was "rejoicing from the crowd", but after Cliven spoke the crowd displayed anger. Lombardo testified that the men in camo were security for Cliven and his speech was "unrealistic". He also said the crowd felt no fear from Law Enforcement. Lombardo also testified that when the Sheriff exited the stage, that's when the cowboy's arrived and, "they had rifles" and that the four people from the Sheriff's Department were outnumbered. After the crowd dispersed Lombardo said he was given command of Las Vegas Metro at the ICP,, where he went immediately, but was not given authority over the BLM. Lombardo testified to setting up the skirmish line and the snipers. He said the group continued to grow in size and that they were under staffed because of the amount of people and that "they had firearms, and the officers did not have adequate gear to ward them off"! Lombardo said he tried to find an informed leader, walking around trying to find Dave Bundy to ask about "his intent", to which Dave stated, "I am here to get the cattle". Lombardo told Dave to control the crowd. Dave told Lombardo, "I cannot control the crowd. You have an hour to figure this out with the cattle". Lombardo responded, "I need eight hours to several days", saying, "the situation was dire because people were moving toward the gate", although Lombardo and Dave had their conversation on the other side of the street in the parking area were he would not have been able to see the skirmish line. Lombardo then told the Jury he gave the order for the BLM to release the cattle because he didn't know if the BLM's training or experience was adequate in a group setting and if "accidental fire" had happened there would be bloodshed stating, "I would need 500 Officers to control the situation". It the last trial it was established that only 47 guns were had in a crowd of 300 Protestors. The Protestors were already outnumbered! Lombardo goes on to tell the Jury the crowd was not afraid of the Police Officers. They were welcoming them, telling them, "we have actual Law Enforcement to put the BLM in check". Lombardo said that because he wasn't confident in the BLM's ability in crowd control he wanted to "get them out of there first".
At this point a video was played of Lombardo, Daniel P. Love, Ryan and Dave Bundy. The video shows Dan Love saying, "I cannot release the cattle. It is against the law and I can not approve you releasing the cattle". Dan Love goes on to give Ryan and Dave a warning about releasing the cattle telling them, "you could be arrested at a later time". The point of Dan Love saying this to Ryan and Dave is to have them implicate themselves in a crime. In the video portion I have seen, Dan Love not only tells Ryan and Dave, but in another clip tells Ammon, "Cliven or his sons need to pull the pin on this gate". This is what Dan wanted to have happen in order to take action against the Bundy's and the Protestors. He wanted a showdown! As testimony with Lombardo continued he said, "the decision to release the cattle was in direct correlation to the amount of supporters were there".
The Prosecution entered into evidence and exhibit of a SWAT Officer in standard gear asking Lombardo, "is this standard gear for BLM agents"? Responding, "I can not testify to that, I can only testify to Metro". Lombardo then testified that the BLM left the area and the cattle were released. The Prosecution asked, "were you concerned for safety when the cattle were released"? Stating, "yes, and I was there for over 5 hours".
Cross examination began with Richard Tanasi asking about men with radios and men in "quasi camo gear". Tanasi asked Lombardo if he saw Parker, Drexler, Stewart or Lovelien there, to which he responded, "no, I cannot testify to that". Tanasi then brought up the subject of the SWAT gear which drew objections and resulted in another lengthy side bar with the Jury and observers being held in limbo. The side bars taking place at this trial differ from the last trial as last trial the Jury and the observers were privy to the discussion, this time, they are having these discussions in private. After the 30 minute side bar Tanasi asked Lobmardo, "so you decided to have SWAT regress"? Lombardo responded, "no, they were there to protect the inner perimeter". Tanasi asked, "they have different levels of gear than regular Police"? The Prosecution objected to that and it was sustained. Tanasi again asks, "so you had SWAT regress"? Lombardo again responds, "no". Tanasi then asks him if he can show him his prior testimony? Will that refresh your memory"? Lombardo responding, "no it wouldn't". Tanasi proceeded to show him his prior testimony where he testified twice to the statement he told the SWAT Team to regress because he didn't want to have the treat level increase because there were people out there in SWAT gear. "That is why I did not have the Metro Officers put on their vests they carried in their vehicles because they wanted to deescalate the situation, not escalate the situation". Courtroom observers say that this line of questioning was objected to several times and it almost resulted in another one of those side bars. Tanasi continued asking Lombardo, "so no arrests were made? So are the people supposed to fear the Police"? Which drew objections that were sustained.
Next Jess Marchese stepped up asking about Lombardo walking across the street to talk to Dave Bundy about communicating with the Protestors and that communication helped deescalate things. Marchese asked how many times he met with Dave Bundy? He responded, "one time prior". During questioning it was established that an hour and a half before he met with Dave the cattle would be released and that there were 50 minutes before there was body cam footage of the meeting amongst Lombardo, Dan Love, Ryan and Dave Bundy. The Defense tried to bring in to evidence video footage of the skirmish line coming across the street to meet with Dave and they were bared from doing so. Marchese brings up the speech on the stage where Ammon welcomes the Sheriff telling the crowd, "you need to be respectful of the Sheriff because he is an elected official, and we have given him authority over us". At this point the Judge stops Leventhal and says, "why are you playing this video"? Responding to the Judge's question the Defense said, "this is how we've done it in the past. I show the video, then we ask our questions". Judge Navarro said, "no! We've already seen the video, now ask your question, and if he doesn't remember THEN we'll watch the video again". The Defense again addressed the men in camo arriving with Cliven at the stage, how the crowd was calm, but got louder with celebration after Cliven's speech. The Defense described how the BLM was lined up at the gate, "but no Protestors were on the bridge"? To which Lombardo went back and forth saying "yes there were, and no there weren't". Courtroom observers say Lombardo kept trying to skirt this issue and had to be led back to it by the Defense. The Defense said, "Dan Love was in charge of the cattle operation, and you were not, until you decided to take it over". Drawing objections. The Defense continued by asking Lombardo if there was anyone on the other side? "Where was your under-Sheriff"? Lombardo stated they were in between Post 1 and 2. The Defense asked, "was he there to deescalate the situation on the BLM side"? Which drew objections. Judge Navarro said, "I don't see the relevance in the question. There is noting to deescalate on the BLM side". The Defense continued, "so, you weren't confident in the training and experience of the BLM concerning groups and crowds"? Lombardo responded, "yes, because that is not the role of the BLM".
Shawn Perez asked only one question. "Did you see Ricky Lovelien"? The Defense rested, and the Prosecution went forward with re-direct.
The Prosecution said, "so you were asked about accidental discharge". The response, "yes". "What other factors were you concerned about with your officers"? Lombardo responded, "safety, the safety of the Nevada Highway Patrol and the safety of the BLM if there had been a firefight". The Prosecution rested with that.
The Defense was then asked if they wanted a re-direct? To which they responded, "no". Observers say the Judge was not satisfied with that answer so Judge Navarro decided to ask her own questions. She started with, "you say you weren't concerned about accidental discharge, where you ever worried about intentional discharge"? To which Lombardo responded, "yes". Judge Navarro, after successfully rewording the Prosecutions question obtaining a favorable response then asked the Jury, "do you have any questions? Write them down on a piece of paper and hand them in to me. Don't write your Juror number on them". The Judge may have just opened a can of worms, because the Jury had plenty of questions and questions she probably would not have allowed if the Defense had asked them! Here we go! First question, there was a reference made to a prior trial? More of a statement as is was reported upon, but THE JUDGE RESPONDED, "there are different hearing in criminal cases, with multiple testimonies, and we'll just leave it at that"! Second question, "what were the operation before they decided to release? Was the plan to release the cattle or ship them out"? Judge Navarro, once again, answered the question, not the witness saying, "this person can not testify to that. That will be a question to ask later on". Third, the question was asked about the definition of "cease and desist", which drew the response, "that means that they were to stop the operation and stop what they were doing". Next question. "Is there a command relationship between the IPC structure at the present and at the time of 2014"? The Judge tells the Jury, "this witness cannot answer this question so, it will have to be asked later on". Next question was, "did you know if their firearms were loaded"? Lombardo actually got to answer this one. "No! I did not know if their firearms were loaded". Next question, "what was the relationship between the Las Vegas Metro and the Bureau of Land Management"? Lombardo again answered, "the BLM had operational authority that they relinquished when I stepped in to take over. The BLM had incident command structure prior to Metro being there. Lombardo then describes a meeting he attended prior to April 12th indicating he knew about that structure and Soul Laurel (?) was the "main person" and Dan Love was under him, but Dan Love was the incident commander on the day of April 12, 2014. Throughout Lombardo's testimony he kept saying he was in fear for the Las Vegas Metro's lives, the BLM's lives, the Nevada Highway Patrol's lives! Never once did he say he was in fear for The People's lives! Shows you were his priorities lie, heaven forbid you should call them for help! He also repeated several times that, "the people were not afraid of the police" implying that the people should be afraid of the police! Something Lombardo may want to think about is that The People elected him and expect that they will PROTECT THEM! That was the end of the days questions. Court was adjourned.
Courtroom observers say everyone, including the media present, were shocked at what happened in court today! "You have to be here to believe it" they said.
Some facts that have been established after this first day of trial. The Defense will, once again, be denied the evidence the Prosecution plans on presenting. The Defense is without a Defense since they are not allowed by the Judge to tell the Jury WHY they went to Nevada and ended up on the bridge by the wash with the right to defend themselves with their firearms. Whatever was effective in the Defense's case in the previous trial will not be allowed in this trial. Although the Prosecution went through the charges point by point with the Jury, the Defense is not allowed to reference the punishment associated with the charges if the Defendants were to be convicted. The support for the Defendants has lifted their spirits as the courtroom has been packed by observers. The Citizenry are not allowed to dress in camo or have their own private security or they will risk being labeled "quasi military/militia", that being a bad thing! Andrea Parker, wife of Eric Parker, is being singled out by Judge Gloria Navarro and being told if she makes one wtong move she will be bared from the remainder of the trial. Not just a sesson or a day, but the duration of the trial! The Jury is allowed to ask the witnesses questions. In what world does this make any sense? The Prosecution may rat on her on this one. Until next time, farewell.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.