DOJ Claims Judge Who Trashed 'Made Up Plot' Should Be Removed For Being 'Hostile' To The Gov't

from the because-the-doj-can't-lose dept

The self-assured nature of federal prosecutors can be quite insane. We’ve talked many times in the past about how the criminal justice system is completely rigged against anything remotely looking like fairness. From grand juries to plea bargains to sentencing guidelines, the entire system is designed to make anyone who enters it presumed guilty until their spirit is crushed and destroyed. In the last few years we’ve noted an even more disturbing trend: law enforcement creating their own plots, in which they lure (often gullible or marginalized) individuals into a convoluted criminal “plot” in which nearly all of the other players are fellow law enforcement folks (or informants). They then build up this big plot… wait until it’s about to go off (knowing it’ll never actually happen) and then arrest those they lured into it. It has happened over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Courts have found that this is technically not “entrapment,” even though it sure appears to come close to it.

That’s why we were quite happy to see a federal judge finally call out one of these questionable plots. Earlier this year, we wrote about Judge Otis Wright (whose name you may recall from the beatdown he gave Team Prenda) calling out one of the ATF’s homegrown criminal plots for “outrageous government conduct” in creating a “made up crime.” Wright detailed how the government picked details of the entirely fictional plot at levels to guarantee felony charges, and also accused it of “trawling… poverty-ridden areas” in a “fishing expedition” dangling huge riches on people who have no money. He further noted that nearly all of the elements of “the crime” were done by the ATF:

But for the undercover agent?s imagination in this case there would be no crime. The undercover agent invented his drug-courier persona, the stash house, the 20 to 25 kilograms of cocaine supposedly inside the stash house, the two individuals supposedly guarding the stash, the need to use weapons, and the idea of robbing the stash house. He even provided the putative safe house and getaway van. Dunlap brought little to the table besides his sheer presence and perhaps the hope of being able to obtain some quick cash.

[….] …here, the undercover agent provided a getaway van, putative safe house, and?most important of all?the entire scheme and its fictitious components. He also alleviated Defendants? logistical and safety concerns when he ?proposed that he would be inside the stash house at the time of the robbery . . . .? …

So, how did the DOJ respond to this setback? Well, via Brad Heath, we see that the DOJ has gone to the appeals court to demand a new judge, accusing Judge Wright of being biased. Seriously.

Reassignment is warranted ?to ensure not only the existence, but the appearance, of impartiality,? such as when ?the district judge . . . may be viewed as having assumed the role of advocate.? … Here, as Dunlap himself has suggested…, the district court?s tone and actions have created the appearance of hostility to the government.

As set forth earlier, the court?s tone has not been one of impartiality. To be sure, a holding of ?outrageous? conduct necessarily entails strong language?condemnation is built into the very standard. But even so, the court?s comments are extreme: accusing the government of ?lead[ing] us into temptation?; of ?stoop[ing] to the same level as the defendants it seeks to prosecute? and ?creating crime?; of targeting people simply for being poor or for having bad thoughts; and of being ?cold-blooded and heartless.? Similar is the court?s refrain that the crimes of conviction were ?fake,? ?trumped up,? ?cut from whole cloth,? or ?made up??after all, it was Hudson who initiated contact, the defendants showed up with guns, one of which Whitfield boasted could cut a man in half…. Similar, too, is the court?s repeated criticism of the investigation as a ?trawling? expedition where bait was ?dangled? ?irresistibl[y]? before poor, ignorant defendants.

It is not just that the substance of the court?s accusations is wrong: merely erring is not grounds for reassignment. It is that the tone creates the appearance of hostility toward a government ?oppressor.? … And that tone is not limited to the court?s description of historical facts: it has been also dismissive to government counsel during hearings.

In short: because the judge called out the ATF and the DOJ for its outrageous behavior, that proves that the judge is biased and therefore unfit to hear the case. Only judges that accept our outrageous behavior are reasonable and should be allowed to hear our cases.

This is the attitude of federal prosecutors. The entire system is already rigged to support us, so if a judge somehow actually pushes back on something we did, then clearly he’s the problem, rather than our outrageous behavior.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “DOJ Claims Judge Who Trashed 'Made Up Plot' Should Be Removed For Being 'Hostile' To The Gov't”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
pixelpusher220 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: What boggles my mind...

Huh, the top of the slope just got higher…and more slippery. Who’d a thunk it?

Exactly what you said, this is a canary in the coal mine moment folks. If the gov’t is saying the impartial referee isn’t partial because they want to make up their own rules…we’re in deep deep trouble.

Advocate (profile) says:

Re: Re: What boggles my mind...

There must be an assumption of righteousness as a default for the government to be able to get business done, but courts exist specifically to quell that assumption in areas where it does not apply.

If half the government were replaced with a system of transparency, accountability, transparency, and oversight, we wouldn’t need the half it replaced and we could start over with trust.

New Mexico Mark says:

Re: Re:

I’ll never serve on a jury in the state where I now live, despite having served on juries in two other states. Five jury summons and five “never mind” responses bear that out. In this state, all potential jurors must fill out a questionnaire. Most of the questions make good sense. However, there is one question that essentially asks the potential juror if they’ll ignore their conscience and just follow the judge’s instructions.

This means all actual selectees for juries in this state have no conscience because of one of the following:
1. They don’t actually have a conscience
2. They can actually ignore their conscience when determining guilt or innocence
3. They have a conscience, but can ignore it when they lie on the questionnaire.


Ima Fish (profile) says:

I don’t know if Judge Otis Wright is biased, but he does seem to have a philosophical bent. Almost as if he believes in some nutty concept such as the separation of powers. As if it’s his job to keep watch over and put limits on the executive branch. And we all know that’s crazy, because the executive branch has to work with complete impunity to protect us from terrorists.

mcinsand (profile) says:

Re: Re: Judge Wright for the Supreme Court

Screw that!

Judge Wright for President! Seriously, I would vote for him in a heartbeat.

However, this is demoralizing. The Department of Justice has become a Department of Injustice, presumed innocent is a bygone concept, and we have become a police state. I guess we just make sure to write letters while we still have a First Amendment and vote while we still have some choice (even though the two parties have effectively become one.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Judge Wright for the Supreme Court

this would require the death or retirement of a sitting justice, unless congress wants to raise the number of justices (and frankly i’m not sure they can). that has a chance to work out to everyone’s advantage so it will clearly not be done.

1st Dread Pirate Roberts (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Judge Wright for the Supreme Court

The expansion of the court is not as radical an idea as it may seem. From the time of its establishment, the size of the Supreme Court was largely dictated by the number of lower courts. As new states were added to the Union and the population grew, new trial courts and circuit courts were created – and new justices added. For example, when a 10th circuit was added in 1863, a 10th justice was added at the same time. When the circuits were reduced in 1866, the number of justices was reduced. Ultimately, the creation of the current nine-number court in 1869 was part of a Congressional decision to create parity with the number of circuits.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Hitler is smiling

Sure it was. He just wanted to be the one in charge of those police. In reality though this is what Putin wants. He is “former” KGB now openly running 1/4 of the worlds power. In response, our “intelligence” community has evened the playing field by making the whole world into the 1984 of Hitlers’ dream.

Uriel-238 (profile) says:

Re: Hitler is smiling

Hitler had a plan to wipe out the peoples he regarded as lesser and replace them with a German elite.

The US is presently merely slouching towards corporate feudalism.

If anyone wins, it’s the imaginary terrorists who hate our freedoms, because those are certainly being annihilated one by one. (Real terrorists have a more specific and less US-centric agenda).

Advocate (profile) says:

Re: Re: Hitler is smiling

There must be an assumption of righteousness as a default for the government to be able to get business done, but courts exist specifically to quell that assumption in areas where it does not apply.

If half the government were replaced with a system of transparency, accountability, transparency, and oversight, we wouldn’t need the half it replaced and we could start over with trust.

The Germans had a strong seat in Philadelphia, they could have influenced American politics to become Nazi in due time, had they not lost first.

Coogan (profile) says:

he should consider himself lucky

Nowadays, being noted “hostile towards the government” will get you blowed up by a unmanned aerial drone. He should be thanking his lucky stars that they just want him off the case.

Either that, or in a few months we’ll be reading a story about how Wright was arrested after some child porn was found on his computer. Coincidence, I’m sure.

Anonymous Coward says:

What's the difference?

“we wrote about Judge Otis Wright (whose name you may recall from the beatdown he gave Team Prenda) calling out one of the ATF’s homegrown criminal plots for “outrageous government conduct” in creating a “made up crime.”

Now that both have received a smackdown from Judge Otis Wright, what’s the difference between Prenda and the government prosecutors?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: what?

Well. A judge is to question everything about any case brought to them government or not. If enough evidence is brought to convince that it needs to be tested in court then warrants are issued and the process for a trial begins during which a judge is to preside and ensure that proper proceeding and protocol are adhered to throughout the course of the trial.

This is one of the rare judges we need to KEEP on the payroll! He seems to be doing his real job compared to the majority that just snooze through their jobs like uncaring drones until it suits them to do otherwise.

Anonymous Coward says:

This government:
Lies to its people.
Lies to itself.
Lies to other governments.
Destroys evidence.
Destroys lives.
Tortures people.
Spies on citizens.
Spies on politicians.
Spies on groups.
Breaks the laws.
Violates the constitution.
Takes money for favors.
Takes favors for favors.
Rigs districts.
Rigs elections.
Rigs trials.
Rigs judges.
Rigs debates.
Rigs evidence.
Rigs attacks.
Invades countries.
Invades private property.
Abuses power.
Abuses authority.
Abuses minorities.
Ignores the will of its citizens.
Imposes its will on its citizens.
Imposes its will on other countries.
Hides misdoings.
Hides evidence.
Hides information.
Hides accountability.
…and I’m sure there are many more I am not thinking of.

Just what is it going to take for people to recognize the corruption and take action?

Uriel-238 (profile) says:

Re: Revolution starts with grievance.

Just what is it going to take for people to recognize the corruption and take action?

Starvation and death.

People join the resistance when their personal lives are directly affected by the process. When they get SWATted and their dog is killed (or their baby burned), when their businesses get extorted to betray their clients, when the police gun down innocents in “defense” or lie as a group in court to throw someone in jail, then those who survive, those who still remain will consider taking up arms, if there is a place to rally.

Coogan (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Just what is it going to take for people to recognize the corruption and take action?

Shutdown ComicCon.
Shutdown the NFL.
Shutdown Tesla Motors.
in progress
Cancel Game of Thrones
Cancel Avengers 2: Age of Ultron
Cancel Star Wars VII
Cancel all pizza delivery service
Cancel Mountain Dew
Have George R R Martin killed
Have Tupac killed check

Anonymous Coward says:

It has begun. I was wondering when the judges will begin being co-opted or replaced in the “land of the free”, now that the government is a complete oligarchy only defending itself and its powerful members. Since the government doesn’t seem to have any interest in respecting the Constitution anymore, it was only a matter of time before the justice system fell, too.

Uriel-238 (profile) says:

This is (now) part of the procedure.

Lawyers with internal integrity have long since been culled out of the system by those without, probably because we human beings suck at being objective and emotionally impartial. This is also how good NYC cops are forced to do their quota (yes, I said it) of 140s. And it’s how judges that don’t work with lying cops to put innocents in jail are removed from the bench.

Especially so if there are further penalties to the Honorable Wright.

If this appeal succeeds in getting Wright ousted from the case, it will be yet another example of how the DoJ is completely busted. (Much like the incidents of law enforcement officers getting caught lying in court without penalties near what a civilian would suffer). It demonstrates that our law enforcement branches no longer serve to reasonably serve the public, but instead serve their own agendas (or those of people in power — in contrast to offices that hold power).

The next step, incidentally, is not outright revolution, but is twofold.

The first is to adopt the policy of Omertà, which is to avoid calling the cops (or any responders) at all costs with the understanding that they will only make a situation worse, this no matter how grievous a matter or crime. We’ll be ready to do this when we realize that the lives lost to crime or fire or disaster is a lesser cost than suffering the intervention of Law Enforcement Agencies.

The second step is to adopt the policy of Vendetta, which is to police ourselves with violent reprisal against wrongdoers and their families (since humans are more motivated to avoid consequences to others than themselves). And ultimately to target law-enforcement officers themselves, responding to their injustices as if they are individuals rather than part of an institution. And again, we’d also target their families in order to make it clear they are responsible for their own actions, no matter how they justify it as “part of their job”.

Yes. This is messy. That is why we don’t do this normally. This is why we prefer to have a police force that has internal integrity and is compelled to serve the justice of the people over preservation of the institution.

This is, incidentally, how we dealt with the medieval Holy Inquisition. And, for that matter, Nazi occupation.

Uriel-238 (profile) says:

Re: Re: This is (now) part of the procedure.

Just to make clear to whatever powers that are reading (please don’t SWAT my house), I’m not so much endorsing classical mobster activism, but simply saying that if history informs, that is how things will progress whether we want it to or not.

I think it also happened in the Soviet Union, which is part of how the Russian mobs formed.

And the reason the police are supposed to preserve their own integrity and not turn into thugs-with-uniforms is to prevent the people from having to resort to such measures.

Mark Noo (profile) says:

One of the nice things about federal judges (I think) is that they are appointed for a lifetime.

Another thing to understand is that prosecutors love to overstate facts (how else are you going to put a guy with a pound of weed in jail for 10 years, you have to be full of shit to think that is right).

Anyway, the prosecutor is a showboat.

Maybe we will get lucky and the judge will find some reason to sanction/fine/etc this guy.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...