Ed :Brown speaks

[Baidn]

And Ed continues to prove just how really stupid and self destructive he is.

His (ex?)wife and Parsons' remain the two non mentally ill people I most pity that have gone to jail. I cannot fathom the depths of low self esteem that would make someone attach themselves to someone so completely dedicated to destroying both their lives.

[Frater I*I]

His (ex?)wife and Parsons' remain the two non mentally ill people I most pity that have gone to jail. I cannot fathom the depths of low self esteem that would make someone attach themselves to someone so completely dedicated to destroying both their lives.

She will soon be his ex, he refuses to sign the paperwork, but has told her that she can consider herself to be divorced, the judge will eventually give a summery judgement. And both ladies mentioned are professional with college degree, submitting themselves to a man unable to get a college degree.

As to you first question considering if he can get out, I'll try to keep it kind brief, but yes he has a good chance of getting out. His co-conspirators, Elaine, Jason Gerhard, Daniel Riley, are out already. This is due to a recent SCOTUS decision in US v Brown [not him], where they decided the second definition of a crime of violence under the US code, "any crime where violence can occur" was unconstitutionally vague, which enhanced all their sentences in the possession of destructive devices conviction [min 30 years]. Why the prosecution didn't argue that being in an armed standoff with law enforcement falls under the first definition [that wasn't challenged to SCOTUS] "the use, attempted use, or threatened use of violence occurs", is anyone's guess.

As to Brown, they make seek to have the first definition applied, therefore getting the enhanced sentence range, or ask that he's shown no remorse for his actions nor have his anti-gov views changed, therefore he's still a danger to society, and ask that the sentences of his crime run consecutive. If neither happens, then the combined max for his tax fraud sentence plus a max for illegal possession destructive devices will equate to time served. In my opinion, he'll walk, the current DoJ is in such a disarray I doubt they'll make a convincing case, hopefully when he screws up again, nobody gets hurt.

[Pottapaug1938]

Ed: does not have to do anything for Elaine to get a divorce. In my younger years, when I still handled divorce cases, I would be consulted by prospective clients who would say "I want a divorce, but he/she refuses to give me one." I always got a big smile when I told them that I could get them divorced without the other party being involved at all. More expensive, to be sure; but still doable.

[Gregg]

Ed: does not have too do anything for Elaine to get a divorce. In my younger years, when I still handled divorce cases, I would be consulted by prospective clients who would say "I want a divorce, but he/she refuses to give me one." I always got a big smile when I told them that I could get them divorced without the other party being involved at all. More expensive, to be sure; but still doable.

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that?

[wserra]

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that? :snicker:

Nope. Just remember to take the cannoli.

[Pottapaug1938]

Ed: does not have too do anything for Elaine to get a divorce. In my younger years, when I still handled divorce cases, I would be consulted by prospective clients who would say "I want a divorce, but he/she refuses to give me one." I always got a big smile when I told them that I could get them divorced without the other party being involved at all. More expensive, to be sure; but still doable.

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that?

I had more than one client "suggest" that such a solution might speed things up.

[Arthur Rubin]

Ed: does not have too do anything for Elaine to get a divorce. In my younger years, when I still handled divorce cases, I would be consulted by prospective clients who would say "I want a divorce, but he/she refuses to give me one." I always got a big smile when I told them that I could get them divorced without the other party being involved at all. More expensive, to be sure; but still doable.

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that?

It's more difficult to have someone declared dead than it seems in the movies. Or, at least, so I've been told. I'm not a lawyer.

[TBL]

Ed: does not have too do anything for Elaine to get a divorce. In my younger years, when I still handled divorce cases, I would be consulted by prospective clients who would say "I want a divorce, but he/she refuses to give me one." I always got a big smile when I told them that I could get them divorced without the other party being involved at all. More expensive, to be sure; but still doable.

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that?

It's more difficult to have someone declared dead than it seems in the movies. Or, at least, so I've been told. I'm not a lawyer.

5 years isn't it? If I recall for the moron who ditched his family and went to Florida was declared dead and then tried to get that death rescinded. It was quite a story when the judge was forced to refuse his plea and declared the law had no process to revive him legally even though he was in the courtroom.

[GlimDropper]

Ed will be the guest of the federal prison system for another 17 years. [Link]

Here is Ed talking to Rudy Davis' wife about his sentencing:

[Baidn]

Well at least he'll have plenty of time to work on his weird new brand of antisemitism Normally I'm more for rehabilitation of the imprisoned but Ed is a perfect example of someone who can't change because they don't want to. Like Parsons he'd rather burn he and any loved ones that don't cut him offs lives to the ground than admit his fell for something dumb.

[The Observer]

I am relieved to see that Ed did not benefit (much) from the Supreme Court decision and that he is going to serve considerable time. Ed is right that this is a virtual death sentence but he only has himself to blame for that, given that his three conspirators were able to change their behavior and thought patterns while behind bars.

[Frater I*I]

I am relieved to see that Ed did not benefit (much) from the Supreme Court decision and that he is going to serve considerable time. Ed is right that this is a virtual death sentence but he only has himself to blame for that, given that his three conspirators were able to change their behavior and thought patterns while behind bars.

While Elaine did, I can assure you the Gerhard and Riley did not. They got off because Brown is the ringleader and the govt wanted him for sure, and didn't waste time on them.

[TheNewSaint]

Remember, Gerhard talked himself from a 5-6 year recommended sentencing range into a 20-year sentence:

https://www.sentinelsource.com/news/sta ... ng%20wrong.

Jason Gerhard, 22, of Brookhaven, N.Y., was sentenced to nearly 10 years more than the federal sentencing guidelines recommended, after he told the judge that he felt “disgust” for the court’s process and did not believe he had done anything wrong.

“This is a kangaroo court,” Gerhard said, when he was offered an opportunity to speak on his own behalf. “How could anyone with half a brain think of imprisoning me for exercising my constitutional rights?”

...

“My belief is that cost him an extra five years,” said Norkunas [Stanley, Gerhard's defense attorney].

[The Observer]

While Elaine did, I can assure you the Gerhard and Riley did not. They got off because Brown is the ringleader and the govt wanted him for sure, and didn't waste time on them.

Can you point to something specifically that the government said in regards to them only pushing for Brown to not be released because he was seen as the ringleader? Like a filed brief or remarks to the court?

And can you point to anything that Gerhard and Riley said or did once the Supreme Court ruling came down that demonstrated a lack of repentance/remorse or an intention to continue on in the same manner as Ed Brown has been doing?

Remember, Gerhard talked himself from a 5-6 year recommended sentencing range into a 20-year sentence:

Yes but that happened at his sentencing. What has he done since then to show that he is still intending to carry on as Brown has?

[Frater I*I]

While Elaine did, I can assure you the Gerhard and Riley did not. They got off because Brown is the ringleader and the govt wanted him for sure, and didn't waste time on them.

Can you point to something specifically that the government said in regards to them only pushing for Brown to not be released because he was seen as the ringleader? Like a filed brief or remarks to the court?

And can you point to anything that Gerhard and Riley said or did once the Supreme Court ruling came down that demonstrated a lack of repentance/remorse or an intention to continue on in the same manner as Ed Brown has been doing?

As to the second part I offer this link, Loonystar's webshite featuring the writings of Gerhard and Riley, along with links to the few phone calls he got from them, you will clearly discern that they have not changed at all as far as their beliefs. They might keep their heads down for awhile, but they will most likely be back.

https://yearofjubile.com/edelaine

For the first part, first there is the fact he got the same SCOTUS ruling, yet got many more years and they got time served. To look it up on PACER will take time, I'm near the limit of my quarterly budget and I still have to go rob a liquor store for Anthony Williams' transcripts.

[ArthurWankspittle]

To look it up on PACER will take time, I'm near the limit of my quarterly budget and I still have to go rob a liquor store for Anthony Williams' transcripts.

Is that to pay for them or to read them?

[The Observer]

They might keep their heads down for awhile, but they will most likely be back.

And that is that what I have been seeing. They were smart enough not to do what Ed Brown has been doing. That alone might have made the difference between getting released and getting re-sentenced.

For the first part, first there is the fact he got the same SCOTUS ruling, yet got many more years and they got time served

Yes, but that sentence was delivered for what Gerhard was doing at the time, not for what he has done after sentencing.

[TheNewSaint]

Remember, Gerhard talked himself from a 5-6 year recommended sentencing range into a 20-year sentence:

Yes but that happened at his sentencing. What has he done since then to show that he is still intending to carry on as Brown has?

The point I was trying to make is that Gerhard (and also Riley) only 'benefitted' from the Supreme Court decision because they got relatively harsh sentences that kept them in jail this long. They may or may not be remorseful, but I think they were sufficiently punished.

[Gregg]

Ed: does not have too do anything for Elaine to get a divorce. In my younger years, when I still handled divorce cases, I would be consulted by prospective clients who would say "I want a divorce, but he/she refuses to give me one." I always got a big smile when I told them that I could get them divorced without the other party being involved at all. More expensive, to be sure; but still doable.

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that?

I had more than one client "suggest" that such a solution might speed things up.

Allegedly.

[TBL]

Would I need to rent a backhoe for that?

I had more than one client "suggest" that such a solution might speed things up.

Allegedly.

More like A-Legend-ly. Word to my boy with the Blaze.