Help strengthen alternative media by visiting our supporters

Sheepdog Supplies

The House Does Not Lose In Las Vegas

the average American, oblivious to these atrocities, goes about their lives

The House Does Not Lose In Las Vegas
Supporters outside courtroom, Las Vegas. (Photo: FB)

The House Does Not Lose In Las Vegas

By Loren Edward Pearce

In Las Vegas, Sin City, it is known that the house never loses.  Likewise, at the U.S. District Court in Las Vegas, Nevada the federal team, consisting of the judge, the prosecutors and the marshals, will not lose in their own house.  The statistics are clearly in favor of the house.  Between guilty pleas and trials, the conviction rate was 99.8% in U.S. federal courts in 2015: 126,802 convictions and 258 acquittals. That wasn’t an anomaly. In 2014 the conviction rate was 99.76% and in 2013 it was 99.75%.

That is why the full acquittal in the Oregon trial of the Bundys et al, is such a miracle.  Now, in Nevada, we have an entirely different situation as the federal team (judge, prosecutors, marshals) double down in a determined effort not to repeat the loss in their own house.  Kelli Stewart, who attended most of the trial in Oregon, was able to see the contrast between the two federal District Courts.  Stewart, who came all the way from Washington to attend court and see/hear/smell/sense for herself how awful Nevada court is, was able to confirm what she had heard from others.  I was in Las Vegas also and it was refreshing to have Kelli confirm what we were experiencing, i.e., that the behavior of the Nevada federal team (judge, prosecutors, marshals) was abysmally awful.

I was there also.  I can vouch for and confirm what she is describing.   As noted in previous articles, the bias and incompetence of Gloria Navarro are breathtaking.  We cannot shrug it off because of the mind boggling consequences to the defendants, many years of prison, sexual abuse, solitary confinement and separation from family and means of earning a livelihood.


1.     Referring to Prosecutor Nicholas Dickinson, Stewart describes his sinister, malevolent and smug mannerisms and behavior as he cross examined defendant Eric Parker on the witness stand.  It almost seemed that Dickinson slithered rather than walked around the courtroom.  As he presented government evidence with photos and video, dozens and dozens of times he would say, “that is you with the long rifle, the vest with the metal plates and the hat with the white logo?”  And dozens and dozens of times, Eric would say respectfully, “yes sir”.  Finally, in frustration, Eric said, “yes sir, I never changed my clothes until that night.”   What Dickinson was trying to achieve, I don’t know, but Peewee Herman weirdness, it was.

2.     As we returned from a break, a supporter of the defendants was beginning to take a seat when a marshal screamed at him that he didn’t have his pocket constitution turned the right way.  The man acted confused and before he could get clarification, a marshal grabbed him by the arm and ejected him from the court.  The marshals demand that the front cover of the pocket constitution not be shown but must be turned around and face backwards.   If there is any doubt that this court is their house, the marshals confirmed it was.

3.     The prosecution presented evidence that Eric Parker was associated with the Idaho 3% militia in an attempt to show the jury that anybody that is associated with a militia is a bad guy.  Regardless of the fact that a civilian militia is mentioned three times in the constitution, the federal team would have you believe that a militia is bad. 


4.     For me, the most shocking development of the trial was the federal team’s use of Facebook posts against the defendants.  The defense attorney’s objected on the basis of authenticity.  Other people can post, tag, like, share or fraudulently post in your name (identity theft) and you are guilty of conspiracy against the federal team and subject to harsh penalties and years of prison if you post something (or somebody posts for you) that the government doesn’t like.  1st Amendment right to free speech?  No mention of the 1st Amendment in front of the jury was allowed.   The defense also objected on hearsay and almost all defense objections were denied by the federal team in their own house.

5.     Dickinson tried to use Facebook posts from Parker that referred to having won against the feds as a show of conspiracy and Facebook quotes from “Art of War” by Sun Tzu as evidence that Parker conspired to war against the feds.  Parker responded that he was debating with another Facebook user about “Art of War” and not conspiring to war against the feds.  Again, the lengths the federal team was willing to go to not lose in their own house.  The feds had pulled off the internet reams of posts, emails and other private matters in violation of the 1st and 4th amendments.

6.     The prosecution showed quotes from Parker that had to do with Range War.  Parker explained that the word “war” does not refer to violence or blood shed any more than the War on Poverty, or the War on Obesity refers to violence.    The prosecution tried to use a video interview with Parker on the bridge where he asked for a “show of force” as further evidence that he was inciting violence against federal officials.  Parker replied that he wanted a show of force in terms of numbers, strength in numbers, not in the use of firearms or weapons. 


 7.     At one point, the prosecution raised the subject of Margaret Houston, the woman who was body slammed by the BLM agent, and the defense claimed that the prosecution had opened the door to having Houston testify.  The federal team (Navarro) sustained their own objection and refused to allow Houston to testify as her testimony would be very harmful to the federal team’s goal to not lose in their own house. 

8.     As you may know, Special Agent Dan Love, who was in charge of the Bunkerville operation, was prohibited from testifying by the federal team (Navarro) so as to not lose in their own house.

Stewart said that we need to prepare the defendant supporters, emotionally and psychologically, for a guilty verdict absent divine intervention.  As she notes in her video, the defense attorneys have basically given up, are ineffective and defeated as they realize it is impossible to win in the house of the federal team.

The problem is this,  losing is not an option for the defense.  Having visited some of the unconvicted prisoners in the Nevada prison, I can say that the degree of suffering and depression experienced by the prisoners is beyond comprehension.  

I am writing this article in a local McDonald’s.  I just overheard one of the customers say, “Are you ready for Easter?”  as the average American, oblivious to these atrocities, goes about their lives.


Put yourself in the prisoner’s place.  What would you do?



1 Comment on The House Does Not Lose In Las Vegas

  1. Kelli has become a dear friend/family in this fight, one of the select of our suppoters. Having her along in our visit to Toquop Wash today, one day short of the three-year anniversary, made it extra special. Navarro makes Judge Brown look like Mrs Santa Clause, and I can barely contain my fury in her courtroom. She is presiding over a grotesque caricature of a trial, more inquisition than legal proceeding, and her rank bias is patent. That the founding charter of the Federal Govt. has been made anathema in her courtroom is only incidental to the Black comedy being played out.

2 Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. BUNDY TRIAL, NEVADA | cindyloulife

Comments are closed.