Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1514
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby Dr. Caligari » Sun Nov 02, 2014 5:59 pm

If that were true, it would be a reliable defense strategy in any number of cases.


Lawyers almost never mount an insanity defense to any but the most serious felonies, because an "acquittal" on grounds of insanity results in incarceration that may be longer and harsher than many prison sentences.
Dr. Caligari
(Du musst Caligari werden!)

fortinbras
Princeps Wooloosia
Posts: 2970
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby fortinbras » Sun Nov 02, 2014 6:10 pm

I think we are all agreed that Modeleski NEEDS psychiatric care, and this is maybe the only way he will actually get any, however bureaucratic it may be.

AndyK
Illuminatian Revenue Supremo Emeritus
Posts: 1299
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 9:13 pm
Location: Maryland

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby AndyK » Sun Nov 02, 2014 6:45 pm

PAM (to me) seems to be a far-down-the-road sufferer of some form of mental ilness.

Perhaps if he had been diagnosed early enough, he could have been treated to the extent that he could have become functional.

Unfortunately, everyone who looked at him, his writing, and his behavior simply viewed him as a clown -- battling the universe to get compensation for his Internet-published magnum opus. No one realized, or took the time to see, that he was ill.

Untreated, some forms of mental illness become self-perpetuating. PAM seems (to me) to be a textbook case. His paranoia fed upon itself, finding enemies and conspirators under every rock, and grew to the point that he could only survive on Planet PAM.

Unfortunately, he ran afoul of the law and now must face a scenario with possible consequences.

In a rational universe, he doesn't deserve or belong in prison. He needs, and deserves, treatment, support, and housing. The likehood that he will ever be ab le to return to our planet seems to b e slim to none. That's still not a reason to cast him aside.

PAM, despite all his faults, is still a human being. As far as I know, he hasn't (outside of some of his inane law suits) harmed anyone. As a society, we have an obligation to care for the weak and sick amongst us.

PAM deserves care and treatment. He does not (now that we have realized he appears to be mentally ill) deserve scorn and abuse.
Taxes are the price we pay for a free society and to cover the responsibilities of the evaders

User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 6315
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 7:39 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby wserra » Sat Dec 20, 2014 10:41 pm

Time for a new thread on Mitch. The Wyoming criminal case against him has come to an end, in a manner that should surprise no one.

In late November, the psych staff at FMC Springfield wrote a letter to the Court, which is unfortunately sealed. We therefore do not know the details; we do, however, know the bottom line. The govt has moved to dismiss the indictment, and the Court has granted the motion. The reason is in the govt's application: Springfield reports that Mitch is not only incompetent, he is likely incurably incompetent. Since the govt declines to crank up the Sell apparatus - see my discussion here - it is a violation of due process to continue to hold him. Application made two days ago; indictment dismissed and Mitch released yesterday. The Court directed the USMS to provide Mitch with the necessary funds to get back to Seattle, where he was arrested.

How long will it take for Mitch to claim that he won?
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume

User avatar
The Observer
Further Moderator
Posts: 6591
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2003 12:48 am
Location: Virgin Islands Gunsmith

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby The Observer » Sun Dec 21, 2014 12:35 am

wserra wrote:How long will it take for Mitch to claim that he won?


Before or after he claims that the determination that he was incompetent was the government's attempt to libel him and ruin his reputation in retribution for being a Private Attorney General?
"I could be dead wrong on this" - Irwin Schiff

"Do you realize I may even be delusional with respect to my income tax beliefs? " - Irwin Schiff

Judge Roy Bean
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Posts: 3529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby Judge Roy Bean » Sun Dec 21, 2014 5:55 am

It would seem our "system" has dumped yet another one back out into the streets to fend for himself.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 10646
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby notorial dissent » Sun Dec 21, 2014 9:16 am

wserra wrote:The govt has moved to dismiss the indictment, and the Court has granted the motion. ....... Springfield reports that Mitch is not only incompetent, he is likely incurably incompetent.

How long will it take for Mitch to claim that he won?

Thanks WES, exactly what i have been saying for months and being told, oh they'll get him doped up, cured, and try him anyway. So here we have it, PAM is certifiably crazy as a bed bug. I'm betting he is already working out his new mythology as we speak.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

LightinDarkness
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1326
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 4:40 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby LightinDarkness » Sun Dec 21, 2014 11:22 am

PAM is considered to be a preeminent scholar and brain trust in the sovcit world, so you can bet not only will this be hailed as a huge win but that more sovcits will try to copy PAM's gibberish.

The government is in a lose-lose situation here. PAM is mentally ill, certifiably so - while his gibberish has no merit, he can't actually be held accountable. But in simply dropping everything and releasing him, this will be another Rod Class style "victory" that will result in more gibberish paperwork burdens for courts as PAM's followers begin to mimic the gibberish in this case.

I'm not sure what the appropriate avenue is here except to PAM to seek treatment, but I guess the court can't do that.

User avatar
wserra
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Quatloosian Federal Witness
Posts: 6315
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2003 7:39 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby wserra » Sun Dec 21, 2014 12:32 pm

LightinDarkness wrote:I'm not sure what the appropriate avenue is here except to PAM to seek treatment, but I guess the court can't do that.


Not unless he's a danger to himself or others, and Springfield found that he wasn't.
"A wise man proportions belief to the evidence."
- David Hume

User avatar
notorial dissent
A Balthazar of Quatloosian Truth
Posts: 10646
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:17 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby notorial dissent » Sun Dec 21, 2014 12:39 pm

PAM really and seriously needs help, but he isn't likely to get if unless he has a major public episode, and he has been very careful to avoid those sort of situation for years. As it is, he will continue being a legend in his own mind and of little other public note.
The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.

.
Pirate Purveyor of the Last Word
Posts: 1678
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:06 am

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby . » Sun Dec 21, 2014 12:41 pm

So, if you're bonkers your best criminal outcome is to be incurably bonkers. You won't wind up not guilty by reason of insanity and locked up a la Hinckley -- you won't be tried at all -- the government will dismiss.

And then you get a bus ticket, no treatment or help, the end. That seems a bad outcome for everyone.

Not hard to imagine action(s) against his next fifty or hundred sorry-that-they-ever-crossed-his-path defendants if he goes back to AOL-mode. What would stop him?

Let him file away if he can get an actual lawyer to do so and put a license on the line. Other than that, federal and state courts might wind up wasting a lot of time dismissing junk pro se suits one at a time.

Shouldn't there be an order based on the psychiatric findings barring filing without prior court approval of any federal pro se lawsuit until he demonstrates his competence? If you are unlikely to ever be competent to understand the nature of criminal proceedings against you, how can you be competent to file a pro se civil lawsuit? Or is that too sweeping?

Seems that bogus pro se lawfare is his chosen means of warfare. Is a blanket bar beyond the power of a DC judge? Or can it only be done one district at a time?

In any case, it seems that the federal bar is too timid about this sort of stuff. Same way that they tell the average TP "We told you not to bring up this frivolous junk again, but we'll give you one more chance" and don't sanction. Then, the same guy does the same thing again and they whack him for 2K. Only after 4 or 5 bites at the apple do they get hit for 25K, if even then. Giant time-wasters. I would have thought that federal judges would prefer to spend their time (and their clerks' time) on things of more import, as imperious as they usually are.
All the States incorporated daughter corporations for transaction of business in the 1960s or so. - Some voice in Van Pelt's head, circa 2006.

Judge Roy Bean
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Posts: 3529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby Judge Roy Bean » Sun Dec 21, 2014 7:04 pm

. wrote:So, if you're bonkers your best criminal outcome is to be incurably bonkers. You won't wind up not guilty by reason of insanity and locked up a la Hinckley -- you won't be tried at all -- the government will dismiss.

And then you get a bus ticket, no treatment or help, the end. That seems a bad outcome for everyone. ...


At least being found incompetent precludes being able to testify in any legal action. And if memory serves he cannot purchase a firearm.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three

User avatar
grixit
Recycler of Paytriot Fantasies
Posts: 3501
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:02 am
Contact:

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby grixit » Mon Dec 22, 2014 4:14 am

So where does he go now? Does he still have a home in Seattle?
I voted for Hillary, and i didn't even get a stupid tshirt!

10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
. . . . . . Dr Pepper
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4

AndyK
Illuminatian Revenue Supremo Emeritus
Posts: 1299
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 9:13 pm
Location: Maryland

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby AndyK » Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:29 pm

Note:

The dismissal was "without prejudice."

Although he most certainly doesn't realize it, the sword is still dangling over his head.

On another (and totally cruel note); perhaps there should be established a rest home for the totally, incurably incompetent. The first two guests could be PAM and David Merrill.
Taxes are the price we pay for a free society and to cover the responsibilities of the evaders

User avatar
Pottapaug1938
Supreme Prophet (Junior Division)
Posts: 4930
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:26 pm
Location: In the woods, with a Hudson Bay axe in my hands.

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby Pottapaug1938 » Mon Dec 22, 2014 3:39 pm

I would add Pete Hendrickson to the list.
"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools

.
Pirate Purveyor of the Last Word
Posts: 1678
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:06 am

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby . » Mon Dec 22, 2014 6:26 pm

AndyK wrote:Although he most certainly doesn't realize it, the sword is still dangling over his head.

On another (and totally cruel note); perhaps there should be established a rest home for the totally, incurably incompetent. The first two guests could be PAM and David Merrill.


Wherever he winds up, he'll likely continue blathering the same old stuff at his earliest possible opportunity. That's not likely to convince anyone that he's suddenly become competent to stand trial. Does anyone seriously think that he'll ever renounce what he's said or done or his self-appointed "status" as a Private Attorney General? I rate the chance of his being reindicted as zero.

As for rest homes, a few days ago I had the very same (twisted) thought. All of these sad old TP gurus brought to mind that there are rest homes for old actors and actresses who are down on their luck, etc. Irwin and Ed and Elaine could all be charter members of a failed TP-guru rest home, but they're all likely to die in prison.

But, even if they were all out on the street TPs are way too cheap to finance any such thing, they can't even pay their frivolous filing penalties, never mind the sanctions for frivolously appealing them. Not to mention that if PAM and DMVP and Irwin and Ed and Elaine and PH were all in the same room for bingo night, there would probably be fights over words in the IRC requiring a call to the local police.

The closest thing seems to be the federal prison system. Three hots and a cot, but with less than optimal co-residents.
All the States incorporated daughter corporations for transaction of business in the 1960s or so. - Some voice in Van Pelt's head, circa 2006.

fortinbras
Princeps Wooloosia
Posts: 2970
Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 5:50 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby fortinbras » Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:14 pm

Perhaps someone who knows the system can explain, but the recent comments here suggest that, since PAM is too nuts to stand trial, he's going to be turned loose to wander the streets. I had thought that the psych determination would result in his being confined to a laughing academy. Which is correct?

User avatar
Dr. Caligari
J.D., Miskatonic University School of Crickets
Posts: 1514
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2003 11:02 pm
Location: Southern California

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby Dr. Caligari » Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:21 pm

I had thought that the psych determination would result in his being confined to a laughing academy. Which is correct?


Had he been found competent to stand trial, but then found not guilty by reason of insanity, he would have been locked up in a mental hospital.

Had he been found incompetent to stand trial but curable, he would have been locked up in a mental hospital until he became competent, and then tried.

But he was found incurably incompetent to stand trial, so he is being released. (Had he been found incurably incompetent to stand trial but also dangerous to himself or others, he could have been civilly committed to a mental hospital, but they did not find him dangerous, only incompetent.)
Dr. Caligari

(Du musst Caligari werden!)

User avatar
KickahaOta
Pirate
Pirate
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 8:45 pm

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby KickahaOta » Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:10 pm

AndyK wrote:Note:

The dismissal was "without prejudice."

Although he most certainly doesn't realize it, the sword is still dangling over his head.


Does anyone know the statute of limitations for the underlying crime(s)? Saying that a dismissal is "without prejudice" is meaningless if the limitations period has expired in the meantime.

Judge Roy Bean
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Judge for the District of Quatloosia
Posts: 3529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2005 7:04 pm
Location: West of the Pecos
Contact:

Re: Mitch Modeleski aka Paul Andrew Mitchell

Postby Judge Roy Bean » Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:29 pm

KickahaOta wrote:
AndyK wrote:Note:

The dismissal was "without prejudice."

Although he most certainly doesn't realize it, the sword is still dangling over his head.


Does anyone know the statute of limitations for the underlying crime(s)? Saying that a dismissal is "without prejudice" is meaningless if the limitations period has expired in the meantime.


Federal crimes range from 5 to 10 years. There is no limit for a cases involving terrorism or sex crimes involving children.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean
The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy.
The Devil Makes Three


Return to “US”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 1 guest