Flipped on the radio on the way home from work on Thursday to hear the Bundy brothers and the rest had been acquitted on all charges. This is after assorted other defendants had individually taken plea deals a few months ago, on the same charges.
I’m thinking “jury nullification”. But people might find it interesting to read a synopsis of instructions to the jury. The requirements for finding the defendants guilty of the conspiracy charges were pretty strict.
There was a peculiar issue that came up on Wednesday when Juror A contacted the judge to complain that Juror B was acting in bad faith, failing to deliberate in an impartial manner, had admitted to be prejudiced against the defendants. Long story short, Juror B was removed and a substitute empaneled. And the acquittal came a few hours later.
I discussed the outcome with my neighbor, who made a peculiar comparison between the Bundy bunch and Occupy Portland, saying that the latter had gotten away with all sorts of stuff, damaged property etc., but never been prosecuted. He was also thinking jury nullification, but that that was a great thing.
Thanks for the explanation from someone on the scene of what was a major WTF?????????????? moment for me yesterday.
All I could think was, what would have happened to BLM protesters if they’d stage an armed takeover of a federal building?
From my work e-mail, here’s what the Secretary of the Interior wrote to Department employees today:
To: All Department of the Interior Employees
From: Secretary Jewell
Subject: Verdict in Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Armed Occupation
As you know, a Federal jury last evening delivered its verdicts following the trial concerning the 41-day armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. While we must respect the jury’s decision because we believe in the rule of law and our system of justice, I am profoundly disappointed in this outcome and am concerned about its potential implications for our employees and for the effective management of public lands.
Deputy Secretary Mike Connor and I visited Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in March to meet with employees impacted by the occupation. It was painful to hear from employees who had devoted entire careers to public service and were worried about their safety as they carried out their important missions on behalf of the American people. It was disheartening to walk room to room and survey the damage and destruction caused by occupiers to the natural, cultural, and tribal resources.
And yet, I left Malheur inspired by the incredible collaboration and partnerships that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Bureau of Land Management had formed with the residents of Harney County long before the occupiers traveled to Oregon. These relationships will endure long after the jury’s verdict. The strong foundation created by relationships, such as the High Desert Partnership, helped the community begin the healing process from this terrible tragedy and get back to the business of working together for the common good.
As we digest the jury’s verdict, our foremost priority continues to be the safety, security, and well-being of people who comprise the Federal family and those visiting America’s public lands. I am absolutely committed to maintaining a safe work environment that allows employees to uphold the laws of the United States and carry out our mission of responsible public land and water stewardship for the benefit of all Americans. That will never change.
I want to again express my sincere thanks to the Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities who worked around the clock to resolve this situation as quickly and safely as possible, and for the dedicated professionals at the Department of Justice for their efforts in this case. Additionally, I want to thank all of the public servants who work tirelessly to conserve, protect, and promote America’s natural and cultural resources. I am proud of you and feel fortunate to call you my colleague.
In the coming days and weeks, I encourage you to take care of yourselves and your fellow employees. The armed occupation in Oregon was and continues to be a reminder that employees in all offices should remain vigilant and report any suspicious activity to your supervisor and, where appropriate, law enforcement officials.
As public servants, we are held to a higher standard in all we do, and I know we can meet this challenge, too. In the face of a difficult situation, we have shown that perseverance and partnership is the best path forward to celebrate and honor our Nation’s incredible landscapes – and all of their uses – for generations to come.
Forget the conspiracy, wasn’t there just a simple charge of criminal damage to federal lands and installations!? They admitted that! But it is a terrible sign that an Oregon federal jury thought this was a correct interpretation of the instructions and evidence. Poor lawyering only explains so much….
Unfortunately, as the letter you posted implies, this verdict demonstrates that the decades of hate and venom directed against the federal land management officials by phony “libertarian” and plutocrat-funded “conservative” resource exploitation groups has borne fruit and requires ever greater vigilance and care on the part of isolated federal employees. It is difficult to see this verdict as anything other than a canary in the coal mine, indicative of further violent and rebellious acts against the federal gub’mint in rural white America. In short, a disaster.
The only question now is, what’s next for the “sovereign citizen” movement?
Maybe the North Dakota Sioux should invite them over…
Popular opinion in the area had a great deal to do with this, I’m thinking.
After alll…what is a jury supposed to be?
A collection of locals.
“Bad lawyering” aside…what if they simply couldn’t seat a jury that would back the feds no matter how many challenges were issued?
Hmmmmm….
AG
The trial was held in Portland. I heard some discussion of the jury’s geographical makeup on our local NPR affiliate: 4 jurors from Portland metro area, the same, i think, from Willamette Valley towns, the rest from other parts of Oregon. It’s not as though the jury comprised solely folks from very thinly populated southeastern Oregon. It should also be noted that there were many “locals” who were strongly opposed ti the actions of the Bundy brothers and their co-occupiers.
A number of other defendants plead guilty in plea bargaining prior to the Bundy trial. And there’s another trial upcoming in early 2017 for some other defendants.