Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

BOMBSHELL: FBI Screws Up & Puts Porn into Bundy Trial

“I'll give it to you in a nut shell,” Mr. Schindler said, “I opened up this guys Facebook evidence and saw a bunch of naked pictures..."

Trial
Mark O. Hatfield U.S.Courthouse Photo: https://www.usmarshals.gov/

 

BOMBSHELL: FBI Screws Up & Puts Porn into Bundy Trial

By Shari Dovale and Aubrie Bosworth

 

The Malheur Protest Trial continued with jury selection being finished by mid-afternoon.

From there, they tackled the Facebook evidence fiasco brought about by the inept FBI.

The defendants argument was presented by Per C. Olson, David Fry’s attorney.

Olson contends that FBI Special Agent Ronny Walker testified under oath in court on July 18th that the unresponsive evidence obtained through the Facebook warrant had been secured by that point. Some weeks later it was determined that the evidence had not been secured and had been shared with people of the court.

There was even speculation that the evidence could have been taken home by FBI or anyone else that may have had access.

Trial
Engraved in wall outside of courtroom 9A. Where the trial is being held.

Scott Bradford, representing the United States, responded with the argument that the order allowed them to wait to seal the evidence until the end of 180 days, which would put the deadline in the middle of the current trial.

The Court seemed to understand the defendants argument that the order was to search for evidence for up to 180 days. Any reasonable person would know that once the search was complete, the unresponsive evidence, or unnecessary evidence, was to be locked up and secured at that time.

However, the FBI seems to contend that, though they completed the search, they can continue to view the unresponsive evidence for the full 180 days.

This is relevant because of what the unresponsive evidence contains.

During a short break, this reporter met with Matthew Schindler, Kenneth Medenbach’s standby council counsel, and got a synopsis of what the evidence contained.

“I’ll give it to you in a nut shell,” Mr. Schindler said, “I opened up this guys Facebook evidence and saw a bunch of naked pictures of his girlfriend.”

This brings back the point of why the FBI insisted on keeping the evidence unsecured for the full 180 days. What is it that they want to do with all these naked pictures?

Considering the ethical dilemmas that the Court is forced to deal with on these issues, and the multiple Constitutional violations to the defendants rights, is this really something else they want to address?

Non responsive evidence are things outside the scope of the warrant. They are unnecessary to the case at hand. It is important that this information not make it to the principles in the case. This is exactly why the warrant was written how it was. To protect the defendants.

The FBI, and it’s gross mishandling of this warrant, has turned this into a pornography issue, which completely changes the course of this trial.

The false testimony of FBI Special Agent Walker must also be addressed. The prosecution contends that just because he said false statements, it doesn’t mean he was lying. I contend that they should first be issued a basic dictionary.

12 Comments on BOMBSHELL: FBI Screws Up & Puts Porn into Bundy Trial

  1. DARN! I dug through tons of discovery and FBI reports, but I missed these juicy bits of “Evidence”. No doubt these pictures are plastered in every FBI bathroom from DC to Guam. Our tax dollars at work….

  2. It’s not laughter you hear coming from the halls of government, and justice. Oh wait, yes it’s laughter! They are ROFL! And, why the hell not, no one is going to do anything! Write your congressman! More protesting! ROFL! All of America is awaiting a change, they have no idea what to change, but they are hoping for change. A hope that will never arrive. The left hopes for killary. The right for trump. Either will mean disaster to the other side! What a mess! What a freak’n mess!

  3. Provocative title but aren’t you really saying some defendant(s) were creating “pornography”? That doesn’t seem great.

    And from what I can tell, these images will specifically *not* be introduced in court because they are, as you carefully point out, “non-responsive.”

    So what’s the issue?

    As for the suggestion that all false statements are lies, a dictionary would indeed be helpful. According to Merriam-Webster, a lie is “to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive.”

    It is obviously possible to make false statements without such intent – false statements that aren’t lies. Sometimes, for example, I tell my wife I “left the keys on the counter” and we find out that’s not true. They’re in my coat pocket.

    • Intent to deceive is the purpose of an investigative agent making false statements. In this particular trial, the US has not produced one shred of evidence over the charges of trespass and possibly vandalism for removing surveillance cameras near the refuge.

      There is much video evidence produced by media and private citizens that demonstrate that no one was intimidated or threatened by ‘brandishing’ firearms, in fact everyone who visited the refuge during the protest were welcomed and treated with respect.

      As is the dismissal of charges against Peter Santilli here in Oregon, who will now be transferred to Nevada where he faces similar charges, a demonstration of the lack of a case against such a peaceful protest. And for those who were not informed, A public school in Burns was closed because the FBI commandeered the facilities, and the employees of USFWS were told by local officials (Judge Grasty and Sheriff Ward) not to return to work at the ‘request’ of the FBI.

      Seems to me, the only use of force by anyone was the force used to assassinate Robert LaVoy Finicum, which neither the FBI nor the Oregon State Police want to bear responsibility for.

      • If the facts are as you say, Fred Marsico, it’s peculiar that so many better informed (direct access to evidence), intelligent, passionate patriots have pled guilty to the intimidation charges.

        As for intent, I’m reluctant to insist much on things I can’t actually see or measure, like other people’s thoughts.

      • Thank you, Fred, for giving us an example of a lie. Pete Santilli’s live streams made it obvious that the armed occupiers were intimidating the people of Harney County. They repeatedly asked them to “Go Home!” LaVoy Finicum caused his own death. He was known to carry two handguns, told the media he wouldn’t let the authorities put him in a concrete box, sped away from a felony traffic stop, and tried to get his gun out of his pocket tree times before he was shot by OSP in self defense. So cut the BS (lying).

  4. Council or counsel? There is a difference. Even a great basketball player like me knows that. The Facebook glitch caused no detriment to any of the defendants, so the evidence should come in. (I learned that in my criminal justice class at Davidson.) And when are naked photos porn? (No need to learn that one. Everyone with half a brain knows. Oh, that’s the problem.)

    • Thanks, corrected the ‘council or counsel’ error, on the other hand, when you break the chain of evidence:

      “…FBI Special Agent Ronny Walker testified under oath in court on July 18th that the unresponsive evidence obtained through the Facebook warrant had been secured by that point. Some weeks later it was determined that the evidence had not been secured and had been shared with people of the court.”

      http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pornography

      pornography
      noun por·nog·ra·phy \-fē\
      Popularity: Top 1% of lookups
      Simple Definition of pornography

      : movies, pictures, magazines, etc., that show or describe naked people or sex in a very open and direct way in order to cause sexual excitement

      Source: Merriam-Webster’s Learner’s Dictionary

      • Only the defendants received the erroneous raw data. No evidence regardless of how tainted is to be shared outside prosecution and defense. If this story isn’t just a made up lie (90% likelihood on that), Schindler violated a court order.

        • No EVIDENCE was shared outside the intended circles, here is not the only place it was reported, there were witnesses. Guess we will see if the Judge thinks a court order was violated.

1 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Malheur Protest Trial - Week 2 - MONDAY - Redoubt News - Oregon

Comments are closed.