OPPT (One Person's Public Trial) - Tucci-Jarraf

[TheNewSaint]

One wonders what HATJ's true believers would consider necessary to put in a "care package"

He seems to be losing a lot of fights with cell mates, so how about a shiv?

[notorial dissent]

One wonders what HATJ's true believers would consider necessary to put in a "care package"

He seems to be losing a lot of fights with cell mates, so how about a shiv?

He'd just hurt himself, he's basically VERY stupid on top of being self destructive, he doesn't need additional help I should think. I suspect his big mouth and winning personality have a lot to do with it, but I'm not sure why he is in that kind of population if he is just on hold pending trial.

[NYGman]

I keep going back and forth on Randy and his beliefs. I am no longer buying the idiot act. He knew very well the funds were not his. I have come back to this conclusion, based on the speed and urgency in the spending of the money. Not only that, but he spent it on Trucks and RVs right out the gate. I think if he really believed it was his, he would have left it in his account for a few days, and as someone who is now trying to act all religious, and god fearing, with his bible verse and all, didn't think for one second to make a small donation to church before spending his ill gotten loot. An innocent, religious zealot would have paid the Tithing right away, and would have just waited for the check to clear, rather than getting Heather on the phone to convince them to take it that day. Randy knew it was a matter of time, and that he wanted to maximize the money fast. Hence the Truck and the RV, busy boy. I am sure he passed a church on the way, yet no mention of any charitable donations, other than to the Charity of Randy. He is happy to invoke the Church after he is caught, but does nothing with his fortune while free. It is all an act, he knows he is going away for a while, and is just playing the game now, likely hoping for a few dollars on his prison spending account to make like a little bit better.

Thing is, after he is convicted, and he will be, I have little doubt, he will probably be forgotten within days, and will have to get by on the few vibrations that are being sent to him by some of the loons at i-uv.com. I am sure he will take great comfort from that... His only potential out is to plead out, which he likely wont do until near the end, at which point it may be off the table. Randy is just another run of the mill, small time crooks, who got caught.

[JohnPCapitalist]

I keep going back and forth on Randy and his beliefs. I am no longer buying the idiot act. He knew very well the funds were not his. I have come back to this conclusion, based on the speed and urgency in the spending of the money. Not only that, but he spent it on Trucks and RVs right out the gate.

Exactly. Given that he bought the RV and truck on the same day that he made multiple transfers between banks, he obviously had decided on what he wanted to buy beforehand. He knew how much they cost. So he knew how much he had to collect from the sham transactions at USAA.

He had to have known that USAA would advance him a small percentage of the transaction as a courtesy. Apparently, USAA would credit you 5% of the sale amount immediately, and wait for the other 95% to clear. If he had been a true believer that the secret treasury accounts existed, he would have tried to deposit the $500,000+, not the $30 million he actually used.

Even if he didn't know the precise percentage they would advance him, he understood the mechanism and he knew he had to make the notional amount of his CD purchase large enough that he'd end up with the $500,000+ to buy the RV and the truck. So he absolutely knew how much he had to hit USAA for. I'm sure the FBI is trying to establish where he picked up this knowledge -- it could be from random experimentation, but it could be from some other knowledgeable source, potentially another co-conspirator.

Having multiple bank accounts in multiple states also shows a certain degree of sophistication. IIRC, the bank account he moved the USAA proceeds into as the penultimate step before putting the money in his account in Tennessee was in Louisiana, where I don't believe he ever actually lived.

I'm not saying that Beane is one of the greatest criminal masterminds around, just that he's more sophisticated than someone whose motives are completely innocent.

[TheNewSaint]

I'm not sure why he is in that kind of population if he is just on hold pending trial.

I suspect Randy isn't in that kind of population, but he manages to get himself punched in the face anyway. He's already changed prisons, and moved cells a couple times (presumably for his safety) and it keeps happening. From what was probably not the roughest prison to begin with.

I can believe he's that annoying. I can see him as the type of inmate who thinks his case is more important than everyone else's, a political prisoner, tries to convert others to the OPPT, chants loudly in his cell, boasts of his imminent release, etc.

[JohnPCapitalist]

I'm not sure why he is in that kind of population if he is just on hold pending trial.

I suspect Randy isn't in that kind of population, but he manages to get himself punched in the face anyway. He's already changed prisons, and moved cells a couple times (presumably for his safety) and it keeps happening. From what was probably not the roughest prison to begin with.

I can believe he's that annoying. I can see him as the type of inmate who thinks his case is more important than everyone else's, a political prisoner, tries to convert others to the OPPT, chants loudly in his cell, boasts of his imminent release, etc.

I also suspect he's one of those who can't resist praying loudly and publicly before dinner, in his cell, etc., and probably tries to convert fellow inmates.

Anybody have any perspective on religiosity in jails/prisons? What percentage of inmates are significantly religious (and not those made-up ones so they can sue to be fed steak and Jack Daniels every night as a "sacrament")? And how much tension is there between religious inmates and non-religious ones?

And is there any 8th amendment issues that other prisoners could raise because they're forced to be in his presence?

[notorial dissent]

I will disagree with you there to a degree. Randy is an idiot, if only because he thought/thinks he can get away with this. He is/was I think always has been a petty criminal of one kind or another. I think he thought he'd finally hit the mother load and had his one last great scam, and he went for it. That it blew up in his face was only the logical result, the fact that he got away with it to a degree is only due to incompetence on USAA's side and not anything Randy did. He still thinks he is going to walk away from this, he's an idiot. As to his beliefs, they are of the du jour variety, whatever fits his needs of the moment, and they are rock solid until they aren't and he has moved on to his next greatest/best thing. And as I said earlier, I suspect he is also incredibly obnoxious and annoying which leads to his face hitting the wall repeatedly regardless of where he is. I'm kind of surprised he isn't in isolation after all this, for his own safety. I suspect he's the type you might just hit to get to shut up since you can't get away from him. He's still an idiot.

[Gregg]

I keep going back and forth on Randy and his beliefs. I am no longer buying the idiot act. He knew very well the funds were not his. I have come back to this conclusion, based on the speed and urgency in the spending of the money. Not only that, but he spent it on Trucks and RVs right out the gate.

Exactly. Given that he bought the RV and truck on the same day that he made multiple transfers between banks, he obviously had decided on what he wanted to buy beforehand. He knew how much they cost. So he knew how much he had to collect from the sham transactions at USAA.

He had to have known that USAA would advance him a small percentage of the transaction as a courtesy. Apparently, USAA would credit you 5% of the sale amount immediately, and wait for the other 95% to clear. If he had been a true believer that the secret treasury accounts existed, he would have tried to deposit the $500,000+, not the $30 million he actually used.

Even if he didn't know the precise percentage they would advance him, he understood the mechanism and he knew he had to make the notional amount of his CD purchase large enough that he'd end up with the $500,000+ to buy the RV and the truck. So he absolutely knew how much he had to hit USAA for. I'm sure the FBI is trying to establish where he picked up this knowledge -- it could be from random experimentation, but it could be from some other knowledgeable source, potentially another co-conspirator.

Having multiple bank accounts in multiple states also shows a certain degree of sophistication. IIRC, the bank account he moved the USAA proceeds into as the penultimate step before putting the money in his account in Tennessee was in Louisiana, where I don't believe he ever actually lived.

I'm not saying that Beane is one of the greatest criminal masterminds around, just that he's more sophisticated than someone whose motives are completely innocent.

You're wrong, Randy only had 1 bank, with several accounts, the credit union in Louisiana was the RV dealer's bank.

[TheNewSaint]

Heather's gotten so lazy, she is now cribbing ideas from Randy's fellow inmates.

No kidding.

http://i-uv.com/affidavit-in-support-of ... -innocent/

Apparently Randy is in solitary confinement (for his own protection, methinks) and overheard two other inmates talking. They passed him their super-powerful paperwork. and he got it out to Heather to have it typed up.

It reference "cestui que trust" - they can't even get the name of it right.

It doesn't show that they've filed it yet, but I can't imagine why she'd be showing it off on i-uv.com if they're not going to.

[notorial dissent]

Crowd source defense strategy, now there's a concept who's time has come.

The daffydavit is the standard prison sovcit arglebargle. Meaningless and useless.

[wserra]

Trial to begin January 23 in Knoxville.

No sooner had the Court set the trial date than the govt files what everyone knew was coming: a motion in limine to preclude prattle about BEing, DOing and FORECLOSing. Good luck, govt.

This should be entertaining. Gregg, how far are you from Knoxville?

[JohnPCapitalist]

Trial to begin January 23 in Knoxville.

No sooner had the Court set the trial date than the govt files what everyone knew was coming: a motion in limine to preclude prattle about BEing, DOing and FORECLOSing. Good luck, govt.

I may be completely missing how lawyers would think about this, but I notice that they didn't try to exclude all sorts of other nutbar irrelevance that Heather and Randy are likely to spout, like the fact that Randy sincerely thought he was using Treasury money that actually belonged to him as the source of the payment for the $30 million in CD's he fraudulently purchased from USAA, or that Heather thinks she's a "B.A.R.-optional lawyer" ordained by God or whatever rubbish she uses to justify her actions. The existence of such nutbar irrelevance could easily be determined from the recorded phone calls, statements on blogs/social media and interviews with law enforcement that interacted with Heather in DC before she was arrested.

[NYGman]

Oh no, how will Heather deal with that. If she can't wave around her UCC filings to explain how she dissolved the US government, and prove she is entitled to the TDA money what will she do? She will no doubt insist it is just another ploy to suppress the truth, and will ignore any instructions that are contrary to her keen legal mind.

[notorial dissent]

I will certainly go with the "ignore any instructions that don't agree with her fantasies" bit. That is her stock in trade.

[NatInPW]

a motion in limine to preclude prattle about BEing, DOing and FORECLOSing. Good luck, govt.

Sorry for the novice questions - but this kind of motion is new to me, and it seems to a layperson an effective way to keep irrelevancies from the jury.

From your comment Wes do you think the judge will deny this motion?

How common are these motions? Are they used in state and county courts as well?

Should the US have asked for other potential crazy arguments to also be excluded? Seems like HATJ has a lot of them.

Is this really an effort to get the judge to think about these issues before the trial starts so that he can immediately decide before things get out of hand?

And if he grants the motion, it really doesn't prevent them from attempting to spout this stuff anyway. I guess the judge would then sanction them?

Can the defense also make a motion in limine?

[Dr. Caligari]

Sorry for the novice questions - but this kind of motion is new to me, and it seems to a layperson an effective way to keep irrelevancies from the jury.

It is.

From your comment Wes do you think the judge will deny this motion?

I'm not Wes, but I expect the judge will grant the motion.

How common are these motions? Are they used in state and county courts as well?

They are quite common, and are used in many state and local courts as well.

Should the US have asked for other potential crazy arguments to also be excluded? Seems like HATJ has a lot of them.

There may be more motions in limine on the way.

Is this really an effort to get the judge to think about these issues before the trial starts so that he can immediately decide before things get out of hand?

The idea is to get a ruling from the judge before trial, instead of an objection at trial after the jury has already heard the irrelevant stuff.

And if he grants the motion, it really doesn't prevent them from attempting to spout this stuff anyway. I guess the judge would then sanction them?

The first time, the judge will warn them. If they persist, things can get ugly quickly. In some cases involving sovcits, repeated violations of in limine rulings have resulted in the defendant's right to represent himself/herself being revoked, and a lawyer being foisted on the defendant.

Can the defense also make a motion in limine?

yes.

[wserra]

a motion in limine to preclude prattle about BEing, DOing and FORECLOSing. Good luck, govt.

Sorry for the novice questions - but this kind of motion is new to me, and it seems to a layperson an effective way to keep irrelevancies from the jury.

It is.

From your comment Wes do you think the judge will deny this motion?

Fuck, no. Judge Varlan will almost certainly grant it. There may be some "I'll rule as it comes up" tinge to the decision, though, for reasons discussed below.

How common are these motions? Are they used in state and county courts as well?

In federal court, quite common, and not only in cases with pro se parties. In state courts, less so, especially in writing. The practice is less formal.

Should the US have asked for other potential crazy arguments to also be excluded? Seems like HATJ has a lot of them.

And here we get to the sticking point. She's pro se. A judge can't just rule that she can't speak, because she has a right to testify. Moreover, she has a right to dispute the facts, and the facts spill over into her beliefs. Have you ever taken someone else's coat from a coat rack, thinking it was yours? You didn't commit a larceny due to a factual misapprehension that negates an element of the crime - you thought it was your coat, so you didn't intend to take someone else's property. These idiots must be permitted to say that they didn't believe they were taking something that didn't belong to them, and must be permitted to explain why.

It's a similar tightrope to the one a court must walk in presiding over a Cheek defense. You must permit a defendant to explain why s/he was not doing something illegal, but can't permit the defendant in the process to present Bizarro World law as though it were real. Hence why the decision on the govt motion might hedge a little. But, for the reasons we've discussed above, it's very unlikely a jury will believe them. Especially Beane.

Is this really an effort to get the judge to think about these issues before the trial starts so that he can immediately decide before things get out of hand?

I'm sure that's part of it.

And if he grants the motion, it really doesn't prevent them from attempting to spout this stuff anyway. I guess the judge would then sanction them?

The first step would likely be to revoke pro se status.

Can the defense also make a motion in limine?

Absolutely.

[wserra]

Damn, Doc C. (Doc C and I may or may not have met in RL, but we pounded a lot of the same counsel tables.)

[Jeffrey]

How common are these motions? Are they used in state and county courts as well?

Equivalent motions were filed in the Bundy trial.

[Siegfried Shrink]

The argument section of the motion refers specifically to points in earlier hearings where such argumenys as they want to exclude have already been ruled on and dismissed. The motion confines itself to jurisdiction, a beloved theme for pseudo-law, and merely eliminating jurisdictional chaffering should save a lot of court time.

Similar limiting motions on other aspects of pseudo-legal argument would in my opinion be harder to argue, because although the woo approach is foredoomed, the argumnets advanced may be such that if advanced in proper format and with arguable case law, might have some probative merit.