Ed and Elaine Brown arrested (Continued)

[wserra]

If it says they are not in BOP custody, does that mean they are somewhere else in the custody of the marshalls?

Yes.

Is it possible that they are dead?

Anything's possible.

[LPC]

Is it possible that they are dead?

Anything's possible.

It's also possible that the Browns were never captured at all, that the news of their capture was a hoax by the U.S. Marshal's service, and that the Browns are still sitting in their home, cut off from the outside world because their cell phone signals are being jammed.

And it's also possible that there actually are no such persons as Ed and Elaine Brown, the people who have been pretending to be Ed and Elaine Brown are really undercover Treasury agents, and that all the events that have been reported in the news (the trial, the stand-off, etc.) were part of a "sting" operation to entrap Danny Riley.

You really never know.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

They may be in a local county or state jail awaiting a hearing before the Federal Court in Concord. Federal pre-trial detainees are kept in local state and county facilities while awaiting trial. If they are going to be arraigned on new charges, I suspect the .gov will not send them to the land of far far away just to bring them back.

Just semi-educated speculation.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

Nothing really new in today's article, other than a nice quote from the Illuminati:

Experts: More charges likely for Browns
The couple publicly threatened officials

By Margot Sanger-Katz
Monitor staff
October 07. 2007 7:56AM

Picture
Ken Williams / Monitor staff
Ed and Elaine Brown of Plainfield.

In many ways, the Ed and Elaine Brown show is over. We will not be able to hear them speak daily on the online Ed Brown Under Siege radio show. We will not see fliers for their parties or see the latest video from a "freedom festival" on their Plainfield property.

But Ed and Elaine Brown's story is far from over. The Plainfield tax protesters, who promised their followers an apocalyptic shootout with marshals and were instead arrested quietly Thursday, will likely face a raft of new charges and see many of their key supporters prosecuted, said experts who have watched the case.

On Friday, U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier said the Browns were in transit to federal prisons where they would begin serving 63-month sentences for tax-related charges. They were convicted in January of conspiring to hide Elaine Brown's dental income from authorities, but managed to avoid serving time for nearly nine months, as they rallied antigovernment support and holed up in their well-equipped home.

So far, the Browns have faced no legal sanctions for their behavior, which included issuing explicit threats against judges, prosecutors and local law enforcement figures, stockpiling weapons, and assembling a barrage of improvised explosives devices, according to court documents and statements from Monier. But in a press briefing Friday, Monier suggested that the Browns will face new charges for that conduct.

"Unfortunately, the Browns have turned this into more than just a tax case," Monier said. "By their continuing actions, allegedly, to obstruct justice, to encourage others to assist them to obstruct justice, by making threats toward law enforcement and other government officials, they have turned this into more than a tax case."
---ADVERTISEMENT---

Several experts who watch the tax protest movement said the Browns could face a range of new charges, including conspiring to impede the marshals, illegal weapons possessions, criminal threatening, obstruction of justice and possession of explosives.

"I don't realistically think they are ever going to see each other again, except in the next trial," said JJ MacNab, a tax evasion expert who has been following the Brown case for a book on the tax protest movement.

During the standoff, the Browns missed a key court deadline, which means they will not be able to appeal their convictions on the tax crimes.

Four of the Browns' supporters arrested in September will also be tried soon. Jason Gerhard, Cirino Gonzalez, Daniel Riley and Robert Wolffe were all accused of aiding and abetting the couple. Gerhard, Gonzalez and Riley were also charged with conspiring to impede the marshals and harm the government, and with possessing weapons in relation to a crime of violence. The weapons charges carry mandatory minimum sentences; Gerhard, who faces the most counts, could be sentenced to more than 125 years in prison if he is convicted.

Their trials, which are likely to be delayed, are currently scheduled for early November.

New arrests may be on the horizon. Monier said Friday that his office would continue to investigate those who helped the Browns before and will monitor supporters for retaliatory action now that the couple is in custody. Several high-profile Brown supporters, including two men who lived with the couple for weeks and one who raised money for their cause, have not been arrested.

The Browns may also live on in the tax-protest movement, which seized the Brown case as a critical example of government injustice. The Browns maintained to the end that there was no law making them liable for federal income taxes, and their stand brought national attention to that perspective. The couple's MySpace page attracted more than 5,000 "friends," many of whom have embraced the Browns' anti-tax views.

"People are tired of this bs that's being shoveled at them," said John Stadtmiller, a radio host and former militia leader, who said he was relieved that the Browns were not harmed by marshals. "They want answers, they want justice, and this is going to continue."

------ End of article

By MARGOT SANGER-KATZ

[ASITStands]

They may be in a local county or state jail awaiting a hearing before the Federal Court in Concord. Federal pre-trial detainees are kept in local state and county facilities while awaiting trial. If they are going to be arraigned on new charges, I suspect the .gov will not send them to the land of far far away just to bring them back.

Just semi-educated speculation.

I observed an arrest by the marshals at one point and awaited information from the BOP website as to the whereabouts of the prisoner. In this case, it involved a transfer across state lines.

And, just as stated above, they are kept in the custody of the marshals in local jails, etc. until such time as appearing before the judge in open court. They may even be kept handcuffed in local motel rooms during transport.

Of course, Ed and Elaine were likely not transported across state lines, but I'd guess from Thursday night until Monday or Tuesday before the judge to be a reasonable time.

It might take longer if the prosecuting attorney hasn't got his case in order, but I'd guess that's not true. One of the comments we read had to do with getting the "go ahead" from supervisors, so I'd guess they were ready with the grand jury charges.

The long and the short is it's not unusual for there to be a few days in which the location and status of a newly-arrested criminal is unknown. I guess you all knew that. This is for the clueless.

[Blackbeard]

No no no. Ed & Elaine work for the federal government. Their whole "tax case" and subsequent "stand off" were just a government ruse to draw out the members of the tax honesty movement into the open and induce them to commit crimes so they can be arrested. They're not in BOP custody, they're in Cabo sipping drinks on the beach!

[Demosthenes]

Marshals investigate potential threats to the nation
By Michael Hampton
Posted: October 7, 2007 3:50 am
Updated: October 7, 2007 10:20 am


Satire became reality Friday afternoon when half a dozen armed federal agents wearing body armor showed up at this author’s home and detained everyone in the house for nearly 90 minutes to determine who might pose a threat to the government.

Marshal John Bolen of the U.S. Marshals Office of Protective Intelligence traveled to Manchester, N.H., to investigate threats of violence allegedly made against Steven McAuliffe, a federal judge in the district court in Concord, and other federal officials in the area. He brought along with him other marshals and agents who would only say that they were with the Treasury Department.

Later in the afternoon the federal agents detained and interrogated another Manchester resident for nearly 30 minutes trying to locate yet another person of interest to them, and then after having set up a Saturday meeting with this person of interest, didn’t even bother to show up.

The threats allegedly originated with Ed and Elaine Brown, late of Plainfield, and supporters of their cause. Marshals took the Browns into custody Thursday night to begin serving 63-month prison terms after a nine-month standoff in which the couple remained in their home, supporters brought food, supplies and firearms, and staged concerts and press conferences on the property.

Reports Friday morning stated that a supporter of the Browns left a threat of retaliatory violence on a MySpace page Thursday night after the arrest, but this author was unable to find such a threatening message. Nevertheless, according to media reports, some militant supporters of the Browns have threatened violence against government officials in the past.

And the marshals, under fresh criticism for failing to protect federal judges properly, desperately needed to look like they were doing something. A report (PDF) released Wednesday by the Department of Justice Inspector General found that marshals’ efforts to protect federal judges had “languished,” with growing backlogs of threats to be assessed and investigated, and improper assessment of threats leading to misallocation of resources.

So, apparently unable or unwilling to face the people who have said they want to shoot government agents, they came to my house instead. And misallocation of resources certainly seems to describe Friday’s incidents.

Bolen’s investigation in Manchester seemed to center around members of the Free State Project, a group whose members pledge to move to New Hampshire in order to help reduce the size and scope of government. “Anyone who promotes violence, racial hatred, or bigotry is not welcome” in the Free State Project, according to a statement on its Web site.

As I have said repeatedly here, I do not believe that using violence against government officials is an appropriate method to effect positive change. For one, it would not have the desired effect. Those of you who have read Matthew Bracken’s Enemies Foreign and Domestic know that shooting government agents is a significant part of the plot in that novel. But to see what would happen, you should read the sequel, Domestic Enemies. This would be a significant step backward for a freedom movement.

In contrast to those espousing violence, Free State Project members spent the last three days trying to determine if Ed and Elaine Brown were truly unharmed, as Marshal Stephen Monier said, and seeking a loving home for the Browns’ presumably abandoned dog.

Hopefully the U.S. Marshals, and other law enforcement agencies, will learn something from this misallocation of resources, and start spending their time going after actual threats.

One final note. Bolen told everyone here that he was seeking our help in preventing acts of violence from being perpetrated. Yet he and the agents who came with him gave numerous conflicting statements to each of us. Normal people call this lying. I would suggest that it’s not a good idea to lie to people whose support you’re trying to enlist. It tends to foster resentment and distrust, and that is the last thing that an intelligence organization should be doing.

[Famspear]

from the Michael Hampton article:

In contrast to those espousing violence, Free State Project members spent the last three days trying to determine if Ed and Elaine Brown were truly unharmed, as Marshal Stephen Monier said, and seeking a loving home for the Browns’ presumably abandoned dog.

Oh, please. Spare us the sanctimonous crapola about the safety of the Browns and a loving home for their dog. Notice that Hampton does not indicated whether the Free State Project members also spent the last three days trying to determine whether the law enforcement people who arrested the Browns were "truly unharmed."

[The Observer]

No no no. Ed & Elaine work for the federal government. Their whole "tax case" and subsequent "stand off" were just a government ruse to draw out the members of the tax honesty movement into the open and induce them to commit crimes so they can be arrested. They're not in BOP custody, they're in Cabo sipping drinks on the beach!

And it's also possible that there actually are no such persons as Ed and Elaine Brown, the people who have been pretending to be Ed and Elaine Brown are really undercover Treasury agents, and that all the events that have been reported in the news (the trial, the stand-off, etc.) were part of a "sting" operation to entrap Danny Riley.

There always has to be one or two jokers in the conspiracy that can't keep their lips sealed. I hope your parking privileges get revoked.

[Demosthenes]

Browns likely a footnote for protesters
Officials, however, may have a lasting lesson

By Margot Sanger-Katz
Monitor staff

October 07. 2007 7:56AM

This June, when Ed Brown and Randy Weaver stood side by side on Brown's Plainfield porch, the similarities seemed clear. Like Weaver, who lost his wife and son in a shootout with federal officials in 1992, Ed Brown and his wife Elaine stood poised to sacrifice their own lives for their strong political convictions.

"This might as well have been 15 years ago with Randy Weaver," said John Stadtmiller, a radio host and former leader in a Michigan-based militia group, who had driven from Texas to New Hampshire for the occasion. "Different issues but the same mindset."

But after federal marshals arrested the Browns this week without violence or incident, their protest's legacy as a great anti-government standoff may fade, said many who have watched similar situations over the years. Ed Brown had told his supporters that his situation might become "another Waco," but the patient approach of U.S. marshals working the case meant that the Browns did not go down in a firefight and they will not be remembered as victims of government violence, like Weaver or the Branch Davidians.

"Nobody remembers how long the ball game went, they remember who won," said Brian Levin, the director of the Center for the Study of Hate Crime and Extremism at California State University, San Bernadino, who frequently trains law enforcement agencies in confronting extremists. Levin said he expects the Brown saga will endure in the collective memory of the tax protest and militia movements, but as an "historical asterisk," not an enduring symbol.

The Browns and marshals waited it out for nearly nine months, making their standoff perhaps the longest involving federal authorities, experts said. But though the wait was punctuated by theatrics, including the Randy Weaver press conference, which drew news organizations from around the country, it featured minimal violence. The couple were arrested on their front porch Thursday by a small group of marshals posing as supporters. According to U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier, not a single shot was fired, despite a stockpile of weapons and explosives spread throughout the house and property.

Experts said that federal authorities learned the patient approach after several botched arrest attempts in the 1990s that ended violently and energized extremists. The standoff in Ruby Ridge, Idaho, where a highly decorated U.S. marshal was killed along with Weaver's family members is a symbol to many in the movement of government power run amuck. The standoff in Waco, Texas, a year later took the lives of 80 people, including four law enforcement officials.

Wide media coverage of the deaths in both cases fueled the growth of militias and other extremist groups in the 1990s, experts said. Ed Brown himself said that he first became suspicious of the federal government after seeing television coverage of the sieges at Ruby Ridge and Waco.

During their standoff, the Browns attracted broad support from across the country. They entertained dozens of like-minded visitors, hosted a party this summer with more than 100 guests, and had more than 5,000 "friends" on their MySpace page. In addition to their own daily radio show, they became frequent guests on other "patriot" radio shows, where they were interviewed about their legal views and strategies for transforming the country's political climate.

But given the resolution, the Brown case is unlikely to remain on the shortlist of spectacular extremist standoffs, said JJ MacNab, who is writing a book about the tax protest movement.

"I think it'll fade," she said. "I think had anything bigger or splashier happened, it would have gone just as big as Waco or Ruby Ridge, but the fact that the marshals were successful means it will fade. There was no big ball of fire or dead child."

"The ones who become legendary are the ones who go down in a firefight," Levin said.

Reached this week, Stadtmiller said that he thought the Browns would remain important icons because they stood up for sentiments shared by many Americans - that the tax laws are illegitimate and the court system unjust. But he too acknowledged that those broad themes may come to overshadow the Browns themselves as time wears on.

"This is going to persist," he said. "There's going to be another Ed and Elaine Brown tomorrow or next week or next month."

The incident may endure longer in the law enforcement community, as an example of how to handle a potentially catastrophic confrontation. Experts praised the marshals' approach to the Brown standoff as patient and wise. Though marshals have endured criticism for leaving the Browns to party and pontificate for months, most watchers think their patience paid off.

On Friday, Monier said that his marshals were well aware of previous failures when they crafted their strategy in the Brown case, though he warned that analogies to previous cases "are always imperfect."

"The marshals definitely used a strategy that ensured everyone's safety, both law enforcement and the Browns. They were taken into custody without incident and I think that's really indicative of a good strategy, patience, and the fact that they have learned from past sieges," said Robert Trestan, civil rights counsel for the Anti-Defamation League.

[LPC]

During their standoff, the Browns attracted broad support from across the country.

What?

I don't know what would qualify as "broad support" in this kind of situation, but I think it means more than a few hundred (at best) hard-core nutcases.

[jg]

But given the resolution, the Brown case is unlikely to remain on the shortlist of spectacular extremist standoffs, said JJ MacNab, who is writing a book about the tax protest movement.

This is simply hearsay and allegation without any evidence to support it!

[Judge Roy Bean]

I don't know what would qualify as "broad support" in this kind of situation, but I think it means more than a few hundred (at best) hard-core nutcases.

I think the only possible definition of "broad" in this case has to be geographic in nature, based on the fact that one car showed up with Montana plates.

[Demosthenes]

I don't know what would qualify as "broad support" in this kind of situation, but I think it means more than a few hundred (at best) hard-core nutcases.

I think the only possible definition of "broad" in this case has to be geographic in nature, based on the fact that one car showed up with Montana plates.

The Montana plates belong to a free state guy (Russell Kanning) who moved to New Hampshire in 2004 but refuses to change his registration to New Hampshire.

[Demosthenes]

The people who traveled to see (and protect) the Browns came from California, Florida, Tennessee, Hawaii, Colorado, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Vermont, Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Massachusetts, Ohio, Arizona, Texas, and New Jersey. If you count the people who didn't travel but sent money and supplies, the list gets even bigger.

On MySpace, the Browns ended up with more than 5,100 "friends".

[Nikki]

And all of those 5,100 friends have gotten together and contributed to the MakeTheStand.com PayPal defense fund a month-to-date total of















wait for it















$0.01

[LPC]

The people who traveled to see (and protect) the Browns came from California, Florida, Tennessee, Hawaii, Colorado, Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Vermont, Maine, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Massachusetts, Ohio, Arizona, Texas, and New Jersey. If you count the people who didn't travel but sent money and supplies, the list gets even bigger.

On MySpace, the Browns ended up with more than 5,100 "friends".

If you assume that the Browns had 30,000 supporters, that's still only 0.01% of the population. You could find more people than that who believe that the earth is flat.

I just don't think that a relatively small number of fruitcakes should be described as "broad support." It gives them too much dignity.

[LPC]

Uh-oh, it looks like the supporters are finally getting serious.

[Nikki]

And Elaine is chopped liver

[LPC]

Reading all the comments on blogs (like http://questforfairtrialinconcordnh.blogspot.com/) about how Ed might be dead, I can't help but remember the comment Ed's "friend" (Something Miller?) made about how Ed was worth more to him dead than alive, and I can't help but think that all the talk about whether Ed might be dead is wishful thinking.

Face it, a live Ed is just another loser in prison. Dead, he would be a martyr. Right now, the "tax honesty movement" doesn't need another loser in prison, but could use a martyr, and Ed's been elected.

So the government continues to work to keep Ed alive despite his death wish, while his "supporters" hope he's dead.

And that's politics for you.