4 ms·

Cliven Bundy standoff case thrown out in another stunning blow to government

35 points by kyleblarson 9y ago

mikestew 9y ago
I haven't been following the case all that closely, but one person quoted mirrors my feelings, and that is that the government case was a "slam dunk". Seemed clear to me: these are the rules, Bundy blatantly broke those rules (almost baiting the government, IMO), so it's just a matter of doing the paperwork. So why, oh why, does the prosecution screw this up? Habit? Incompetence? It was not as "slam dunk" as we amateurs thought? I'm trying to give the prosecution the benefit of the doubt, but I'm having a really hard time of it.
- bronson 9y ago
  Did you read the linked article? http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/rebuke_of_federal_us_attorneys.html http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/rebuke_of_... "In the meantime, the dissection has begun: How could prosecutors have lost sight of due process, one of the basic tenets of the legal system." Near as I can tell, the prosecution committed malpractice. Turning over Brady material is such a basic part of criminal law that the prosecution can't claim it did it out of ignorance. It makes no sense. For now, like so many things in the gigantic federal government, it's a mildly concerning mystery.
  - mikestew 9y ago
    Did you read the linked article? More than that, I even quoted from the linked article. :-) But I think you're just restating what this IANAL said: I dunno, seems like a horrible oversight (to put it mildly), and I'm as mystified as you are. But I, too, would like an answer as to how this doesn't get you fired on the spot. I'm not a lawyer, but the law is not a complete mystery to me, and it sounds like this prosecutor is either massively incompetent (you mean to tell me you had no clue that this might get a case thrown out?), or willfully obstructing justice.
    - valuearb 9y ago
      Prosecutors willfully obstruct justice all the time, because they never get fired or punished for anything.
  - xbmcuser 9y ago
    In such a high profile case most prosecutors and investigators would have been very carefull about crossing every T correctly. Such blatent disregard for the rules and then the judge says the he can't be prosecuted again smells very fishy to me.
    - valuearb 9y ago
      They were very careful in hiding information that was damaging to their case. It's not fishy, its a standard US Federal Prosecutor playbook. It's not like they get arrested or fired for doing this.
dpc_pw 9y ago
So my understanding is that government officials did a bunch of illegal stuff, maybe the whole thing was illegal and corrupted in its core, so they decided to rather withhold the evidence of their wrongdoings and loose than expose the amount of corruption. I am simply amazed by the whole thing. No matter what is the actual "legal" and "illegal" here, and who's right and wrong: to stand up against the Federal government as an individual is extraordinary. An to actually win... unthinkable.
- notyourday 9y ago
  He won this stage of a fight because the prosecution acted like drunken sailors in a dive bar, except that it was not a dive bar but Eleven Madison Park. It is unclear and highly debatable if, should the government appeal the order, the order would stand What we do have here, however, is a yet another example why it is important for both sides not to be so convinced that the other side does not have a chance - we saw it with Democrats being absolutely convinced that Trump would be destroyed in the general election and now we see this.
  - sounds 9y ago
    The case was dismissed with prejudice. An appeal should only be granted if the plaintiff can show grounds for an appeal, which would require extraordinary evidence of judicial misconduct.
rdiddly 9y ago
I'm no fan of these spoiled rotten ranchers (since I'm not enjoying any free goddamn grazing rights myself), lecturing everybody about the Constitution and so forth, but when the government prosecutors cheat like this, it makes me start to think maybe their grievances were legitimate all along.

35 points by kyleblarson 9y ago

I haven't been following the case all that closely, but one person quoted mirrors my feelings, and that is that the government case was a "slam dunk". Seemed clear to me: these are the rules, Bundy blatantly broke those rules (almost baiting the government, IMO), so it's just a matter of doing the paperwork. So why, oh why, does the prosecution screw this up? Habit? Incompetence? It was not as "slam dunk" as we amateurs thought? I'm trying to give the prosecution the benefit of the doubt, but I'm having a really hard time of it.

bronson 9y ago
Did you read the linked article? http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/rebuke_of_federal_us_attorneys.html http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2017/12/rebuke_of_... "In the meantime, the dissection has begun: How could prosecutors have lost sight of due process, one of the basic tenets of the legal system." Near as I can tell, the prosecution committed malpractice. Turning over Brady material is such a basic part of criminal law that the prosecution can't claim it did it out of ignorance. It makes no sense. For now, like so many things in the gigantic federal government, it's a mildly concerning mystery.
- mikestew 9y ago
  Did you read the linked article? More than that, I even quoted from the linked article. :-) But I think you're just restating what this IANAL said: I dunno, seems like a horrible oversight (to put it mildly), and I'm as mystified as you are. But I, too, would like an answer as to how this doesn't get you fired on the spot. I'm not a lawyer, but the law is not a complete mystery to me, and it sounds like this prosecutor is either massively incompetent (you mean to tell me you had no clue that this might get a case thrown out?), or willfully obstructing justice.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    Prosecutors willfully obstruct justice all the time, because they never get fired or punished for anything.
- xbmcuser 9y ago
  In such a high profile case most prosecutors and investigators would have been very carefull about crossing every T correctly. Such blatent disregard for the rules and then the judge says the he can't be prosecuted again smells very fishy to me.
  - valuearb 9y ago
    They were very careful in hiding information that was damaging to their case. It's not fishy, its a standard US Federal Prosecutor playbook. It's not like they get arrested or fired for doing this.

dpc_pw 9y ago

So my understanding is that government officials did a bunch of illegal stuff, maybe the whole thing was illegal and corrupted in its core, so they decided to rather withhold the evidence of their wrongdoings and loose than expose the amount of corruption. I am simply amazed by the whole thing. No matter what is the actual "legal" and "illegal" here, and who's right and wrong: to stand up against the Federal government as an individual is extraordinary. An to actually win... unthinkable.

notyourday 9y ago
He won this stage of a fight because the prosecution acted like drunken sailors in a dive bar, except that it was not a dive bar but Eleven Madison Park. It is unclear and highly debatable if, should the government appeal the order, the order would stand What we do have here, however, is a yet another example why it is important for both sides not to be so convinced that the other side does not have a chance - we saw it with Democrats being absolutely convinced that Trump would be destroyed in the general election and now we see this.
- sounds 9y ago
  The case was dismissed with prejudice. An appeal should only be granted if the plaintiff can show grounds for an appeal, which would require extraordinary evidence of judicial misconduct.

rdiddly 9y ago

I'm no fan of these spoiled rotten ranchers (since I'm not enjoying any free goddamn grazing rights myself), lecturing everybody about the Constitution and so forth, but when the government prosecutors cheat like this, it makes me start to think maybe their grievances were legitimate all along.