Update: nesara.news is growing with many new articles 
being posted with a few exclusive originals as well. 
Everything seems to be working well including the forum. 
Please feel free to visit and comment. 
We are still seeking more writers and publishers to contribute. 

~Freewill

Tuesday, April 18, 2017

Bundy Ranch Jury in Deliberations

The jury is now in deliberations in the first round of trials concerning the Bundy Ranch standoff of 2014. Sadly, the real criminals of the Bureau of Land Management were not on trial.  The fate of six men, who have trumped up charges against them, are in the hands of a federal jury in Las Vegas.
The jury in the Bundy Ranch standoff case began deliberations.  KTNV reports:
After two months of testimony and a day and a half of closing arguments, verdicts aren't expected until next week.
One by one, most of the defendants' supporters left the courtroom gallery on Thursday as Acting Nevada U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre (MI'-ree) finished his summation.
Myhre says the standoff wasn't about free speech, protests or the right to have firearms.
He says it's about a threat the six men armed with assault-style rifles posed to federal agents who Myhre says thought they were going to die.
Defense attorneys told the jury the government didn't prove conspiracy and other charges, including assault on a federal officer.
Indeed they didn't because there was no conspiracy or assault except by federal agents of the BLM who knowingly and willfully were violating the US Constitution to suppress free speech, indicate that men had no right to keep and bear arms and attempt to intimidate American citizens through the very means they claim against the defendants, namely using snipers and hundreds of armed agents against the people gathered in Bunkerville.
John Lamb provided an update of what has been going on and informing people that the jury had not yet reached a verdict as of Monday afternoon.
Many who have attended the trial say that they could barely stomach the outright lies told by the government.
"There are arguments by the prosecution which are outright lies!" wrote Ruger Hound.
"Yes it was impossible to sit through the lies," added Lamb.
Jeremy Wilson had a positive outlook, hoping for the best.
"I really hope that the defendants have the positive outcome as they did at the refuge," he commented, referencing the dropping of charges against reporter Pete Santilli and the full acquittal of the Bundy brothers and several others.
The Las Vegas Review-Journal provided some of the back and forth between prosecutors and the defense that is worth reading.
Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre has argued, “There is no evidence, none … that there was any misconduct on the part of BLM agents."  No evidence at all?  What do you call this?  Is this guy corrupt or what?


The defense put to bed all the accusations against the men.  Some of the accusations were down right hypocritical.
“There is no Second Amendment right to threaten someone with a gun, nor is there a First Amendment right to threaten someone,” Myhre said.
So, what were those hundreds of armed agents doing threatening the people gathered at Bundy Ranch with?  Oh, that's right, guns.  What was Daniel P. Love doing at Bunkerville?  Oh that's right, using his mouth to threaten those people with force.
Defense: Attorney Rich Tanasi, who represents Steven Stewart, said his client went to Bunkerville “not to commit crimes, not to assault federal officers, but to exercise his First Amendment right to protest … and he did so with his Second Amendment right.”
That's exactly what they did, and they had every right to do it.
LVRJ also reported:
A man recently acquitted in the armed occupation of Oregon’s Malheur National Wildlife Refuge was arrested Thursday in Las Vegas after he showed up at federal court to watch closing arguments in the first Bunkerville standoff trial.
Kenneth Medenbach was acquitted in the fall, along with two of rancher Cliven Bundy’s sons, of conspiracy charges resulting from the 41-day wildlife refuge takeover. But he is on probation after being convicted of illegal camping in a different case last year. In that case, Medenbach erected a cabin on public land, posted “No Trespassing” signs, and claimed legal ownership when authorities ordered him to take it down.
The terms of Medenbach’s probation prohibit him from traveling outside the federal district where he was convicted without explicit permission from his probation officer. His lawyer, Matthew Schindler, said Medenbach asked his probation officer if he could leave to attend the trial in Bunkerville, where passionate supporters of an anti-federalist movement have packed courtroom benches for weeks. The probation officer said no.
Medenbach decided to travel to Nevada anyway and was arrested for violating his probation.
Well, what can I say, it was not a smart move on Medenbach's part.
Now, thousands are praying that the jury will see through the smoke and mirrors of the central government and deliver more acquittals for these men who were simply standing with honest American citizens and the Constitution against a tyrannical beast and its agents of lawlessness.
It's funny, people want brave men to stand.  They want heroes.  They claim to desire men of valor and courage and conviction, but when those men take a stand, people abandon or ridicule them.  Shame on those people who have done so to these men and men like them.
If you wish to help any of the men who are still political prisoners being held against their will and from their families because they stood against tyranny, click here.    If you would like to support a house in Nevada that is caring for wives and children of these men as they attend the trials, please click here.


 http://freedomoutpost.com/bundy-ranch-jury-in-deliberations/

2 comments:

  1. The fate of six men, who have trumped up charges against them, are in the hands of an attorney they paid to speak for them.

    And they participate in selecting the people that will determine their future, from a pool of people selected for them to select from.

    They know nothing about how often those people were on a jury, and know nothing about how many times those people decided in deliberation someone was guilty.

    For all we know, and we don't know anything, it could be the entire group selected were people who always convict whoever is on trial.

    Most don't know their rights, and many will say if you don't won't to get in trouble just do what the 'show of authority' says.

    So their fate is in a lot of places, but it certainly does not belong to them if someone else gets to decide their future.

    ReplyDelete
  2. “The power of the judge and prosecutor has over the jury is in direct proportion to the jury’s ignorance.”

    ReplyDelete