While we are going about our business today, 17 political prisoners await the results of a watershed hearing in Las Vegas, NV. Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen (who will not preside over the actual trial) will hear oral arguments related to:
– All motions to sever (16 total): the outcome here will weigh heavily on the ability of the Government to move to segregate defendants into “tiers” slated for trial in Feb 2017, May 2017, and August 2017. Early on, the Government was confident that many defendants would plead out. So far, 17 defendants remain, and now the Government wishes to separate them into three separate trials. There are pros and cons for both sides if the Government succeeds in doing so, however, defendants in the 2nd and 3rd tiers have expressed the sentiment that the move violates 6th Amendment rights to a speedy trial, especially given that they are denied pretrial release. Ongoing detention is effectually punitive at this point, despite a supposed presumption of innocence.
– Ryan Payne’s motion to strike surplusage: this outcome will determine how much of the prejudicial language in the superseding indictment is shown to a jury. Ironically, the superseding indictment reads almost like the fake, blatantly fabricated, patently false narrative that he and Brian Cavalier promulgated after Bundy Ranch.
– Ryan Payne’s motion to transfer: Payne has requested either a venue change to another district or for a change to Reno, NV. In my opinion, either option has substantial negative outcome. A change to another district would all but guarantee a trial in California. Call me crazy, but I don’t see the Government saying: “good call guys, let’s see if we can squeeze you in to Idaho, Utah, or Wyoming”. The change to Reno wouldn’t provide substantial benefit either, assuming that the jury pool is selected from the entire District of Nevada. With either option, a venue change could cause a trial delay if the venue already has other trials scheduled.
Trending: Did the NYPD Just Save the Country?
– Finally, multiple motions to dismiss: Payne, Santilli, Bundy (Cliven, Ammon, Dave) collectively have 11 motions to dismiss certain charges.
You can read more about the issues and the fight here: http://bundyranchstandoff.info/important-hearing-for-bundy-ranch-political-prioners/
When the Court rules on these motions, we will have a clearer picture of the trajectory this case is going to take, both with regard procedure and prejudice (of which there should be none).
Share, share, share… get the word out.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author and are not not necessarily either shared or endorsed by iPatriot.com.