U.S. marshals attack lawyer in Bundy case


Readers!
 
For many reasons, mostly political but partly ethical, I do not use Google, Facebook, Twitter. They practice corrupt business policies, while targeting conservative websites for censoring, facts repeatedly confirmed by news stories and by my sense that Facebook has taken action to prevent my readers from recommending Behind the Black to their friends.
 
Thus, I must have your direct support to keep this webpage alive. Not only does the money pay the bills, it gives me the freedom to speak honestly about science and culture, instead of being forced to write it as others demand.

 

Please consider donating by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar below.


 

Regular readers can support Behind The Black with a contribution via paypal:

Or with a subscription with regular donations from your Paypal or credit card account:


If Paypal doesn't work for you, you can support Behind The Black directly by sending your donation by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman, to
 
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652

 

You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage. And if you buy the books through the ebookit links, I get a larger cut and I get it sooner.

Fascists: Just after a jury had acquitted the defendants on all charges in the Bundy occupation of a federal wildlife preserve, U.S. marshals surrounded the lawyer of one defendant as he was arguing that his client should now be released, threw him to the ground, tasered him, and then arrested him.

As noted by another defense lawyer in the case, “What happened at the end is symbolic of the improper use of force by the federal government.”

Or as another lawyer noted,

Margaret “Margie” Paris, a University of Oregon law professor and former dean, said she couldn’t believe what occurred when she learned of the confrontation. “It just blows my mind,” Paris said. “To have a lawyer who’s making an argument in court physically restrained and taken down is extraordinary. He’s entitled to make these arguments. If he was repeating himself over and over, the more typical response is to hold him in contempt. But to physically accost him is just shocking.”

Read the article. The behavior here by federal officials reeks of corruption and the abuse of power.

Share

7 comments

  • Rene Borbon

    Reading this story and seeing the video interview was just another reminder of how the use of government force, as exercised by some authorities today, has gone too far. What the Marshals apparently did was unnecessary and unprofessional. I hope there will be consequences for the Marshals, though I expect there will be none.

  • C Cecil

    Maybe they are practicing for arresting some of the corrupt people in the current administration when Mr Trump takes office.

  • Edward

    From the article: “Suddenly, a group of about six to seven U.S. Marshals, who had been either standing or seated around the perimeter of the courtroom, slowly moved in and surrounded Mumford at his defense table. The judge directed them to move back but moments later, the marshals grabbed onto him.

    ‘What are you doing?’ Mumford yelled, as he struggled and was taken down to the floor.

    As deputy marshals yelled, ‘Stop resisting,’ the judge demanded, ‘Everybody out of the courtroom now!’

    Holy Toledo! The U.S. Marshals took over the court against the court’s expressed demand. Talk about abuse of power; the Marshals are not the ones in power within the courtroom. This does not just reflect badly on the entire U.S. Marshal system (what training are they giving these guys, if they feel entitled to violate the directions of the court and act on their own?), but it reflects badly on the judge who cannot control his court.

    This also raises the question: why were there half a dozen Marshals in the courtroom in the first place. Usually a courtroom only has one bailiff assigned.

    If anything, it is the U.S. Marshals who should be held in contempt of court.

    What is this country coming to when the U.S. Marshals are the thugs? Maybe they should wear gray and black with a couple of white lightning bolts on their collars. It looks like the Marshals are trying to intimidate anyone else from resisting their wishes.

    All the attorney wanted were papers of authorization from the Federales, but all he heard was, “We don’t have to show you any stinking papers!”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsdZKCh6RsU

  • Joe

    Beginning to find myself confused as to which country I reside in, what rule of law?

  • Tom Billings

    Edward said:

    “Holy Toledo! The U.S. Marshals took over the court against the court’s expressed demand. Talk about abuse of power; the Marshals are not the ones in power within the courtroom. This does not just reflect badly on the entire U.S. Marshal system (what training are they giving these guys, if they feel entitled to violate the directions of the court and act on their own?), but it reflects badly on the judge who cannot control his court. ”

    In fact this is only a single instance in the decades-long slide of the U.S. Marshall’s Office. At this point in time its disestablishment, with a 5-year investigatory and research period following, and re-establishment without any of its former employees participating, is the only thing that should restore trust in the institution.

  • Lee S.

    No offense intended my USA’n friends… But seriously WTHeck is going on over there? Are marshalls police? ( I don’t really fully understand the US legal system..) , but while the whole Bundy case is somewhat bizzare to my European eyes, a legal representative getting assaulted by the guys meant to keep order is truely bizzare!!
    ( and what’s going on with your election by the way? Do you really have to choose between a buffoon and a crooked psychopath??? The rest of the world sends our sympathys to the good honest folks over there!!)

  • Edward

    Lee S. asked: “No offense intended my USA’n friends… But seriously WTHeck is going on over there?”

    We wish we could figure it out. Whatever this is, it isn’t the country that we grew up in.

    Marshals are supposed to be police, but it looks like they have taken the old western movies a little too much to heart; the movies in which the marshal says “I am the law.” Rather than enforce the laws, they seem to act like they get to make up the law as they go along. It gets quite scary, not knowing what they will taser you for.

    We also do not understand whatever our legal system is turning into. One person gets convicted for security violations and another gets to be president after multiple security violations — each worse than the poor convict’s were.

    As for our election, you would have to ask someone who voted for Trump to explain why he voted for the crooked psychopath during the primary (or was it the buffoon, I have trouble with the difference between them).

    As for Clinton, well, Democrats think that the presidency is a matter of taking turns, sort of like a group of children riding a single swing, and it is Clinton’s turn next, because in Democrat-land, everyone’s ability, outcome, and condition is equal to everyone else’s (how egalitarian). Fortunately, Democrats are not children, so they take turns in an orderly fashion; no one ever cuts in line. Oh, wait. Obama did in 2008, because that year had been declared as Hillary Clinton’s turn.

    Thank you for the sympathy, but we soon will need suggestions as to which (relatively) sane countries would be the best ones to move to.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *