Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

struggle4progress

(118,032 posts)
Fri Oct 28, 2016, 08:30 PM Oct 2016

Did the feds botch the Bundy case?

Scott Martelle

... Armed and angry, the activists seized the property to protest imprisonment of two ranchers convicted of setting fires that spread to federal land. The protest quickly blossomed into a challenge of the federal government’s right to federal land, during which the occupiers blatantly violated laws against possessing firearms in such a facility.

That’s not a theory cooked up by a prosecutor. The seven defendants acknowledged in court that that was exactly what they had done. During the occupation, they appeared in news photos with firearms plainly visible, shot off rounds at the compound, and some vowed to fight if federal agents sought to regain control of the federal facility. Eleven others involved in the takeover have already pleaded guilty.

Yet a jury found brothers Ammon and Ryan Bundy and five others not guilty of conspiracy charges arising from the occupation. Though as one juror is reported to have said, that doesn’t mean the jury found them innocent. The problem, the juror said, was the federal prosecutor failed to make the case that what occurred at the wildlife refuge was, indeed, a conspiracy, as it charged.

“It should be known that all 12 jurors felt that this verdict was a statement regarding the various failures of the prosecution to prove 'conspiracy' in the count itself – and not any form of affirmation of the defense's various beliefs, actions or aspirations,” the anonymous juror told the Oregonian in an email, adding that after the verdict was read the jurors met with the judge and pressed her on why the prosecution went the conspiracy route in the first place ...


http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-bundy-oregon-malheur-20161028-story.html

10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Did the feds botch the Bundy case? (Original Post) struggle4progress Oct 2016 OP
Yes (n/t) PJMcK Oct 2016 #1
Yes (n/t) Lochloosa Oct 2016 #2
Obviously jberryhill Oct 2016 #3
Res ipsa loquitur geek tragedy Oct 2016 #4
They blew it from day one when they did not arrest anyone. Ford_Prefect Oct 2016 #5
woa. KICK and Rec. BlancheSplanchnik Oct 2016 #6
Yes... awoke_in_2003 Oct 2016 #7
I'm not sure they botched it. The O.J. Simpson trial revealed the danger of sympathetic jurors. Nitram Oct 2016 #8
California had to lose the OJ trial for democracy to be preserved jmowreader Nov 2016 #9
They overcharged MosheFeingold Nov 2016 #10

Ford_Prefect

(7,817 posts)
5. They blew it from day one when they did not arrest anyone.
Sat Oct 29, 2016, 04:27 AM
Oct 2016

White Privilege and Gun Culture excused the Bundy gang and absolved them of "conspiracy". If they had been Black or Native American or college students they would have had a very different reception and fate. Because they were white middle class Americans with weapons no one thought they were dangerous enough to arrest. Someone once said the Bundys held a tailgate party that ran long and it seems the jury felt that was the level of coordination within the group.

As one juror is reported to have said, that doesn’t mean the jury found them innocent.
“It should be known that all 12 jurors felt that this verdict was a statement regarding the various failures of the prosecution to prove 'conspiracy' in the count itself – and not any form of affirmation of the defense's various beliefs, actions or aspirations,” the anonymous juror told the Oregonian in an email, adding that after the verdict was read the jurors met with the judge and pressed her on why the prosecution went the conspiracy route in the first place.

Because, the juror said they were told, it would have resulted in the toughest sentence.

“We were not asked to judge on bullets and hurt feelings, rather to decide if any agreement was made with an illegal object in mind,” the juror wrote. “It seemed this basic, high standard of proof was lost upon the prosecution throughout.”

In fact, the juror suggested, the government was overconfident in its case.

“The air of triumphalism that the prosecution brought was not lost on any of us,” the juror wrote, “nor was it warranted given their burden of proof.”


******************

But at the very least, the verdict should remind the U.S. Justice Department that a case, and a conspiracy, that might seem obvious to a prosecutor isn’t necessarily obvious to a jury. That’s an important lesson as the government heads to court once again.

jmowreader

(50,447 posts)
9. California had to lose the OJ trial for democracy to be preserved
Tue Nov 1, 2016, 03:04 PM
Nov 2016

The LAPD and the crime lab contaminated the evidence in that case so badly the only thing the jury had left was "well, we are pretty sure he did it." You can't send someone to prison for the rest of his life on "pretty sure."

MosheFeingold

(3,051 posts)
10. They overcharged
Wed Nov 2, 2016, 04:07 PM
Nov 2016

They did this because the actual charges (due to the way the law was written) were pretty weak -- a misdemeanor, in fact.

So, they swung for the fences, and struck out.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Did the feds botch the Bu...