Demosthenes wrote:Tax protesters fail miserably at the concept of "You have the right to remain silent."
So true! But it's the desire to make a new convert or validate their own argument. Or, maybe, it's just a desire to hear themselves speak. Either way, it's error.
In days of yore when the sui site was on the safe-to-visit list I ruffled a number of feathers among the anti-lawyer crowd when I suggested pro-se criminal defendants should also be ready and willing to try do-it-yourself vasectomies.
The Honorable Judge Roy Bean The world is a car and you're a crash-test dummy. The Devil Makes Three
I had one file an appeal listing as one of the grounds that he tried, but couldn't find an attorney to take his case. I came within a hair's breadth of calling then and saying, "Have you ever considered why that might be the case?"
Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.
Postby Imalawman »
Disilloosianed wrote:I had one file an appeal listing as one of the grounds that he tried, but couldn't find an attorney to take his case. I came within a hair's breadth of calling then and saying, "Have you ever considered why that might be the case?"
I find that I very often have to bite my tongue when dealing with TPs.
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown
I don't know what a god-man is, but if Andre Labier is one, I think Wolfe is taking a big chance by bad mouthing him.
Completely unrelated, is there anyone who would declare that his yea is not yea and his nay is not nay?
"Here is a fundamental question to ask yourself- what is the goal of the income tax scam? I think it is a means to extract wealth from the masses and give it to a parasite class." Skankbeat
Disilloosianed wrote:I had one file an appeal listing as one of the grounds that he tried, but couldn't find an attorney to take his case. I came within a hair's breadth of calling then and saying, "Have you ever considered why that might be the case?"
I find that I very often have to bite my tongue when dealing with TPs.
Have you tried to biting their tongue instead? It's more effective.
When chosen for jury duty, tell the judge "fortune cookie says guilty" - A fortune cookie
United States of America
v. Criminal No. 07-cr-190-01-GZS
Robert Wolffe
O R D E R
At a hearing this day, defendant withdrew his motion for
bail (Document no. 20). The “Notice of Error; Demand for
Judicial Review and Relief From Grand Jury Indictment for Fraud”
(Document no. 21) is struck since defendant is not proceeding pro se and it has not been signed or filed by counsel.
SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
James R. Muirhead
United States Magistrate Judge
Date: October 31, 2007
cc: Paul J. Garrity, Esq.
Arnold H. Huftalen, Esq.
Robert M. Kinsella, Esq.
Demosthenes wrote:United States of America
v. Criminal No. 07-cr-190-01-GZS
Robert Wolffe
O R D E R
At a hearing this day, defendant withdrew his motion for
bail (Document no. 20). The “Notice of Error; Demand for
Judicial Review and Relief From Grand Jury Indictment for Fraud”
(Document no. 21) is struck since defendant is not proceeding pro se and it has not been signed or filed by counsel.
SO ORDERED.
____________________________________
James R. Muirhead
United States Magistrate Judge
Date: October 31, 2007
cc: Paul J. Garrity, Esq.
Arnold H. Huftalen, Esq.
Robert M. Kinsella, Esq.
Given his thoughts on BAR members, why has Wolffe not fired his attorneys yet?
He has accepted a plea bargain. That means that as soon as the next hearing can be arranged, he might just walk out.
The bad news about that is that he will plea to a felony charge and he will lose his rights. I know he is doing this for me.
That bothers me alot and I’m thinking seriously about calling the Vermont Law school and see if I can get consultation.
He isn’t being indicted for conspiracy (thank God), but it is because they don’t have anything there to charge him.
I believe that he is innocent and he can actually walk out of there innocent – but he will have to stay there a few months longer.
My friends here have already told me that they will help me if Bob feels like fighting.
My ‘adopted’ father has purchased my new laptop for his wife. He is giving me exactly what I paid for it, which is nearly 900. That will help me supplement my bills to cover what my regular pay won’t. We each already have desktop PCs, we only bought that for on the road, and now we don’t need it.
I have many other things I can sell that have value and I’m going to start selling stuff today. Christmas will be only in my heart this year, not from Walmart, except for you, my dear friend. My sisters can .. well you know, we don’t need to get into that.
Bob is a man who won’t enjoy reporting to a probation officer, peeing in a cup, or not having his guns (he loves his guns), or not exercising his right to vote. I am going to ask him what he wants most today when I talk to him on the phone. I’m sure his public defender is anxious for him to sign on the line to admit to guilt. I cannot have that. There has to be another way. If Bob is willing to sit it out, I will not cry and display any suffering to him while he is there.
Her "regular pay"? You mean, she's kept her job at the US DOT while storing an e-book instruction manual on her government computer on how to murder federal employees?
Location: Formerly in a cubicle by the window where I could see the squirrels, and they were married.
Postby Imalawman »
Demosthenes wrote:Update from Wolffe's wife, Valeri:
So there, what do you think of that?
Love ya, Valeri
I think its pretty sad. Actions have consequences, its time to accept that. If you're into your husband sitting in jail for the majority of his remaining life, then go ahead and refuse to plea. Otherwise, listen to your attorney.
"Some people are like Slinkies ... not really good for anything, but you can't help smiling when you see one tumble down the stairs" - Unknown
Guess Valeri wasn't quite accurate in her description of events...
Brown enabler indicted
2 conspiracy counts are added to ally's list
By Margot Sanger-Katz
Monitor staff
November 03, 2007 12:26AM
A grand jury has added new charges for a man accused of helping tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown evade capture.
A new indictment made public Thursday says that Robert Wolffe, of Randolph, Vt., has been charged with two counts of conspiring with other supporters to hinder the U.S. government. At the time of his arrest, in September, Wolffe was only charged with aiding and abetting the Plainfield couple.
Wolffe is accused of lending the Browns his car, staying at their house in his camper, providing armed security and performing counter-surveillance. He is also accused of providing his home as a transfer point for mailed supplies after marshals stopped the Browns' postal delivery. If he is found guilty of all the charges, he will face a substantially longer prison sentence than he would have under the original, single charge.
The indictment also joins Wolffe's case with those of three other Brown supporters charged as co-conspirators.
In a 35-page court filing penned by Wolffe this week, he acknowledged that he and his wife had been overnight guests at the property, that they loaned the car, that he videotaped U.S. marshals, carried a gun on the property, and delivered supplies to the couple. In the filing, which was rejected by the judge because it did not come from Wolffe's attorney, Wolffe argues that none of these actions constitute crimes.
"It is an undisputed fact that my actions were falsely construed as a crime by my false accuser," the document says, naming a deputy U.S. marshal who worked on the case, and the prosecutors. "However, for want of any evidence, and for want of proof of mens rea, and actus reus, my actions are all shown to be totally and completely lawful acts of rightful, peaceful remonstrance."
n a 35-page court filing penned by Wolffe this week, he acknowledged that he and his wife had been overnight guests at the property, that they loaned the car, that he videotaped U.S. marshals, carried a gun on the property, and delivered supplies to the couple. In the filing, which was rejected by the judge because it did not come from Wolffe's attorney, Wolffe argues that none of these actions constitute crimes.
"It is an undisputed fact that my actions were falsely construed as a crime by my false accuser," the document says, naming a deputy U.S. marshal who worked on the case, and the prosecutors. "However, for want of any evidence, and for want of proof of mens rea, and actus reus, my actions are all shown to be totally and completely lawful acts of rightful, peaceful remonstrance."
His filings weren't accepted, but you can bet they will be used against him as admissions-- he has essentially pleaded guilty, and doesn't even know it. Sad.
