Brown Trial, Part 3

A collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only.
User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 6369
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 7:39 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby wserra » Sat Jul 18, 2009 2:48 pm

LPC wrote:It seems fairly clear that the 5-10 minutes spent searching by the average Quatloosian was 5-10 minutes more than was spent by the average Brown defense lawyer.


Why do you say that? It is entirely possible that they found exactly what is posted here. It is just not the job of a defense lawyer to debunk potentially exculpatory information. So long as it is presented in good faith - what the lawyer relates is what in fact happened - the decision as to whether it proves anything is for the Court. Were you a client facing the rest of your life in jail, would you want your lawyer to tell you that anything potentially exculpatory is BS? Especially if you have a live witness to whom you have spoken?

Of course, we're paranoid/suspicious by nature, so we check everything.


Just like any good defense lawyer.

BTW, in any high-profile case stuff like this comes out of the woodwork. In the bombing case, one day we received a package from the govt, with a cover letter stating that the lengthy enclosures were provided per the govt's Brady (disclosure of exculpatory evidence) obligations. It contained letters blaming the WTC bombings on the usual assortment of space aliens, Zionists, Illuminati, and CIA agents. We had received most of them too, but pictured how the govt probably cackled over sending it to us. So, pursuant to our reciprocal discovery obligations, we did the same. The difference was that we knew that the govt was so anal that they probably assigned someone to spend a few days reading, indexing and bates-stamping it all.

And yes, a couple of the least delusional things were actually presented to the Court.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume

Bud Dickman

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Bud Dickman » Sun Jul 19, 2009 7:10 pm

Scoop scooping:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs ... /907190306

Filing: New evidence for Browns

User avatar
Imalawman
Enchanted Consultant of the Red Stapler
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Imalawman » Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:10 pm

You know though, that takes some balls to interfere with a federal investigation and trial and totally make something up like that. Now, it would have been more impressive had the person come to the office in person with that BS story. Its a little harder to lie to someone's face than over the phone.

Any guesses on who? I think Haas has to be the front-runner at this point.
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown

User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 6369
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 7:39 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby wserra » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:01 pm

Imalawman wrote:balls
...
Haas


Cognitive dissonance.

Took the Fifth at the supporters' trial, then learned his lesson and stayed away from E&E's trial completely. Babbles from the sidelines. What a guy.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume

User avatar
Lambkin
Warder of the Quatloosian Gibbet
Posts: 1202
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:43 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Lambkin » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:05 pm

I don't think Haas could pull it off. He is so clearly mentally defective that I don't think he could tell a believable lie without also transmitting what a kook he is.

User avatar
Imalawman
Enchanted Consultant of the Red Stapler
Posts: 1808
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 9:23 pm
Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Imalawman » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:13 pm

wserra wrote:
Imalawman wrote:balls
...
Haas


Cognitive dissonance.

Took the Fifth at the supporters' trial, then learned his lesson and stayed away from E&E's trial completely. Babbles from the sidelines. What a guy.


Thank you for pointing that out. It was before I had morning coffee. In retrospect, its pretty cowardly to call up someone and lie to them over the phone with no way of them figuring out who was behind it. Though, one wonders what end result the perpetrator had in mind? I mean, its not as if it could go on very long before it was discovered as a hoax. Hmmm..interesting...
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown

User avatar
Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:11 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Demosthenes » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:23 pm

Haas didn't take the Fifth. Danny and gang never ended up calling him to the witness stand, which was no suprise considering that Danny's and Reno's lawyers weren't interested in that whole RSA 123 thing which is what Joe wanted to talk about.

Joe didn't attend most of the supporters' trial because he was on the witness list and was therefore sequestered. He didn't show up to the Brown trial because he thinks his not showing up gives him grounds to sue in civil court.

If Ed is involved in whatever it is that's going on now, Joe may be aware of it, but that would be the extent of his involvement.
Demo.

User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 6369
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 7:39 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby wserra » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:39 pm

Demosthenes wrote:Haas didn't take the Fifth.


Oops. Sorry. Getting so that you can't keep the wackos straight without a scorecard. Fortunately, Demo keeps a scorecard.

I seem to recall that brave internet Rambos did take the Fifth, no? Who were they, Demo?
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume

User avatar
Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:11 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Demosthenes » Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:51 pm

wserra wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:Haas didn't take the Fifth.


Oops. Sorry. Getting so that you can't keep the wackos straight without a scorecard. Fortunately, Demo keeps a scorecard.

I seem to recall that brave internet Rambos did take the Fifth, no? Who were they, Demo?


In the Brown trial:

Constitution Ranger Scott Dion and his wife

In the supporter trial:

Elaine Brown
Jose Gonzalez (Reno's daddy)
Romeo Gonzalez (Reno's brother)
Terry Melton (Internet radio host)
Keith Champagne ("Keith in RI")
Demo.

User avatar
cynicalflyer
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 292
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 2:07 am
Location: Half Way Between the Gutter And The Stars

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby cynicalflyer » Mon Jul 20, 2009 5:59 pm

Bud Dickman wrote:Scoop scooping:

http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs ... /907190306

Filing: New evidence for Browns


And Haas' rant was blocked.
But while it was up, it basically made the point that the phone call/David Quinn MUST be true and the Marshals MUST have worked with the Forseti Group, etc.

In other words, establishing in the "patriot" community (that still pays attention or cares) the Brown's were (further) railroaded...
"Where there is no law, but every man does what is right in his own eyes, there is the least of real liberty." -- General Henry M. Robert author, Robert's Rules of Order

User avatar
Demosthenes
Grand Exalted Keeper of Esoterica
Posts: 5773
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:11 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Demosthenes » Mon Jul 20, 2009 6:28 pm

Haas reposted his rant on nhfree.com.

Here's the latest from: "Scoop":

RE: http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs ... /907190306

and of my reply

entitled: "Time for "The Mighty Quinn" to be seen and heard! "

of: "Although the Marshals might not have contracted with this company, as to have hired them, or worked "with" them, as alongside at the same time, the Mighty Quinn*, they might have used them, like they used the power of persuasion upon the N.H. Electric Co-Op of Plymouth to unbolt the power leading into the "compound" so that the Free Speech and of Association rights by the First Amendment (and Art. 12** + 22, N.H. in "how"** so to terminate) be terminated in what was an Art. 10 Revolution by the Browns against what they perceived was an unlawful attack upon them and their private property.

Militant actions by militants using federal force as evidence against the real evidence that was NOT allowed to be put into the case for the jury to weigh in that there be no 40USC255 acceptance of our N.H. RSA 123:1 offer as required by the case-law as spelled out in the Adams v. United States U.S. Supreme Court case of 319 U.S. Reports 312 of 1943, see Note 14 for this Statute At Large, of not to be applied to the in-small of withIN one of the 50 states UNTIL this action be taken, and here in New Hampshire, by that federal officer under oath to have to file by the "shall" word of papers with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State!

Look at the precise wording of this Huftalen assistant to the U.S. Attorney, and compare it to his signed attempt to try to have Cirino Gonzalez waive his right to not be transported to outside the District unless he gives them his written "consent". And so yet ANOTHER "consent" word violated! and there being nothing done about it!? Reference 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution and 18USC3232 respectfully, as both Ed & Elaine were transported to Maine illegally too two times. I even have the original signed document that Reno did mail to me proving this. Did either of the attorneys for Ed or Elaine call me to the witness stand? on a subpoena duces tacum to bring this evidence that should have been marked into an exhibit! Why not? Because they are in cahoots with this judge and the one who pays them these checks for their travels over to there in Portland.

Who to put a halt to this? I've complained to the G.S.A. Landlord of this Art. III, Section 1 "inferior court" of Congress, and its head tenant too: Nancy Pelosi, The Speaker of the House, and to my Federal Congresswoman Carol Shea-Porter by my filing paperwork with her Dover office on my Friday afternoon visit to there to have this Judge George Z. Singal impeached!

Does Judge David Brock Hornby want to be put into the same boat? Re: his having been assigned to the Kevin Guay land case, see my Archives here for maybe this judge will be "brillian"t enough to have figured this out of checking for their operating papers before he sets sail to over here in what is like the Sargaso Sea or "Bermuda Triangle" where everyone who sets foot here withOUT first looking into this gets swallowed whole. No escape but to try to wrangle out of the mess by deviation from The Rule of Law!

* "Mighty Quinn (Quinn the Eskimo) by Manfred Mann" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnQFmvICP_0 of 3:06 minutes, with 209,387 views so far. Does the Rudman Building have an owl? (;-) or a fake one like at The State House? Watch out for The Pigeon Man. You've seen that Alfred Hitchcock movie of "The Birds", right? And of the swooping birds by the bridge over on Loudon Road by Fort Eddy Road? Might such a flock take to this place? (;-) An Omen? "
Demo.

User avatar
Dezcad
Khedive Ismail Quatoosia
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:19 pm

Re: Brown Trial, Part 3

Postby Dezcad » Mon Jul 20, 2009 8:28 pm

07/20/2009 NOTICE OF HEARING as to Edward Brown, Elaine Brown: Telephone Conference set for 7/24/2009 11:00 AM before Judge George Z. Singal. The court in Maine will initiate the call. (dae) (Entered: 07/20/2009)


Return to “Public Archives -- Read Only”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Common Crawl [Bot] and 0 guests