Government notes from Dogwalker's infamous day

[EliotNess]

This is a very interesting opportunity you've been afforded here on Quatloos, Mr. Riley, because normally we just eviscerate first and ask questions later.

You'd be wise to take us up on this offer.

I appreciate your generosity. My mistake for assuming that was a stupid question. The answer is: Yes, I want to help,

[sarcasm]What, do you think I'm here subjecting myself to this abuse for the hell of it?![/sarcasm]

Great, you want to help him.

Do you honestly believe that either he or you have the necessary level of experience and skills to navigate the federal judicial process OR that such skills can be easily obtained from Internet sites?

Nikki, bring your level of questioning up a notch, the answer to these are obvious (no offense).

[Nikki]

The answers may seem obvious, but you need to say the magic words.

Otherwise, you can always go back and claim you never agreed with something thus making a subsequent argument or conclusion invalid.

Back to you.

[grixit]

Ok, ianal, so take this for what it's worth, but here are my suggestions.

1. Take inventory of the facts.

Understand that law and jurisdiction are what they are, you can not wish them away. Danny is accused of breaking real laws by and before real entities that are in fact within their authority to do so. And yes, he is a just plain citizen of the US, not a one man nation state, a god ordained diplomat, or the Prince of Big Rock Candy Mountain.

What do the indictments say that he did?

What does Danny say he did? That is what were his actions, unadorned by rhetoric or rationalization?

Does his story actually deny any of the charges?

2. That should be the basis for a plea, but you need a lawyer to advise you on that.

3. As for tactics, forget the "sovereign" fantasies, you need to operate in the real world. In the real world you can investigate the police, but not for connections to the JewMasonAlienGirlScouts. You can check to see if they did all their paperwork. But again, it's up to your lawyer to determine if that is possible and to decide whether to use a private detective. You might be able to get some evidence supressed or charges dropped. Just not by making the kind of claims that Danny has.

4. Once you've done what you can, you have to consider what his chances are with the charges that remain. Usually that would be the time to see about a plea. The problem is that Danny has apparently already told what he knows but without adopting an attitude of cooperation. So try to get him to change that attitude.

5. If he still wants a trial, then let him shut up and let the lawyer do the talking. If he really believes that his intentions will help, let his lawyer ask him about them on the stand. If he can be trusted to give simple answers. Just remember, that will give the prosecution the right of cross examination. And while i'm pretty sure that real life prosecutors ore not allowed to provoke defendants the way you see on tv, it only takes one paytriot rant to lose the jury entirely.

6. If there is a trial, you should be prepared for the possibility of losing. So Danny should be ready to address the judge before sentencing. And he should be prepared to say how he intends to behave in the future: like fighting the income tax through political action, not by potentially endangering innocent bystanders. Perhaps he can say something like if i had it all to do over again, i'd have volunteered for Ron Paul.

[Doktor Avalanche]

Mr. Riley:

If the court-appointed attorney isn't to yours or Danny's satisfaction and liking, perhaps you might want to consider coming out of pocket for a private attorney.

Especially a good one. It might up his chances for a favorable sentence. That is assuming, of course, you can persuade him to take our advice.

And, oh yes, I am not a lawyer...

[wserra]

If you really are Riley's brother, and you really want advice, consider the following. I spent fifteen years of my thirty year legal career defending people charged with federal crimes, and neither I nor anyone other than your brother's lawyer can advise him what he should do in court. I can advise you as to how you can help, though.

He needs to understand that he is in his current position because of him and no one else. Not the government, not the Illuminati, not his lawyer, not even the Brown, family:felons. Him. Once he takes responsibility for what he did, he will stop looking for others to blame, for excuses and for non-existent loopholes. He will then begin to focus on what he can do to minimize the harm he has done to himself and to those who care about him. If he never does realize that he has met the enemy and he is him, he will maximize that harm.

Good luck.

[.]

If you really are Riley's brother

If he is, why does he show up here in smart-ass mode?

Is denial of reality genetic?

Were I Riley's brother and had I read even a few threads and were I actually interested in helping him, the ultimate ignoramus and perpetual motion machine, now in one of the deepest legal holes imaginable, I'd be extremely solicitous of the denizens here.

He could have made a clear statement up-front of who he was and what he was about and asked for help right off the bat. Instead, there's obscurity, insults and debating points. The footprint of a troll, related or not.

[LPC]

Once he takes responsibility for what he did, he will stop looking for others to blame, for excuses and for non-existent loopholes. He will then begin to focus on what he can do to minimize the harm he has done to himself and to those who care about him. If he never does realize that he has met the enemy and he is him, he will maximize that harm.

I would like to add that the same thing is true on the civil side of the courthouse as well. There are very few legal actions in which there is a party that is totally free from some blame for what happened, and the most difficult clients to represent are the ones who can't see their own part in what happened. (Right now, I have the opposite problem, which is that my client is trying to take a reasonable point of view while the opposition is making "settlement" demands that represent more than they would get if we go to court and my client loses on every issue.)

Sometimes there are things that I can say that will help my clients accept what has happened and is happening. But only sometimes.

In another thread, there was a discussion of the "client's best interests." The client often doesn't know his or her own best interests, and I have to admit I'm not sure I do, either. In my philosophy, it is entirely possible that it is in the client's long-term emotional or spiritual best interests to lose in court, even though that is not in their short-term financial interests. So I do what I can, and I try to see some wisdom in the final result, even when my client loses.

[VanMeters Revenge]

oh come on now, do you really think a relative of someone you publicly insult and bash in your forum is going to run to you with open arms or would want to play the name game right off the bat and not have a hint of sarcasm to their tone especially after his love for his brother was questioned?

[Nikki]

oh come on now, do you really think a relative of someone you publicly insult and bash in your forum is going to run to you with open arms or would want to play the name game right off the bat and not have a hint of sarcasm to their tone especially after his love for his brother was questioned?

Not necessarily. Not everyone thinks like you do.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

EliotNess,

When I found out that Robert Howard was appointed to represent Danny, I asked a criminal defense lawyer in New Hampshire about him. Robert Howard is the real deal. An extremely smart, experienced, and talented lawyer. Your brother was lucky to have him appointed. Given the high profile nature of the case, I suspect that Robert Howard was appointed to represent Danny because of Howard's reputation.

Way back in the day, I was on the Court Appointed Counsel list (at the insistence of my employer). I did not know squat about criminal law (and know even less today). I was only appointed on rare occasions, and always the lowest defendant on the totem pole. Hacks like me didn't get important cases.

I can not give your brother legal advice what to do. However, I would suggest that he have a "come to Jesus moment" and start to work with his lawyer. At one point, Danny looked like he might be able to accept responsibility and work out a deal through his lawyer.

IIRC, he also had the chance to have a pscyh eval done, but decided not to. I don't see how an eval could have been bad. Even if he did not have a legitimate competency to stand trial issue, being somewhat delusional might be a good thing when it comes time for sentencing. No offense meant to Danny, but he does not appear to really grasp what is happening around him.

Then again, I am hardly a real lawyer and don't know squat about federal criminal defense these days.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

You are all very smart legal and financial professionals of one form or another and you all seem to have it all pretty much figured out.

Most, anyway.

I don't see an upside to engaging in a futile debate about that.

Translation: "I have no means with which to defend my position so I'll roll over, play dead, and declare victory."

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati - Red Green

[Demosthenes]

[sarcasm]What, do you think I'm here subjecting myself to this abuse for the hell of it?![/sarcasm]

You originally came to Quatloos to post snarky comments under a pseudonym. That's called trolling. You were not here to help your brother; you were here to attack Quatloos, just like the snarky comments about us that you've posted on nhFree and your Danny blog. Frankly, we don't care what you think.

We do care, however, that your brother and the others get a fair trial, and you, Donna, Jose, Valeri, and Joe Haas seem to be doing your damnedest to make sure that that doesn't happen.

Some evisceration was necessary to kill off the attitude in hopes that you would be willing to hold a real conversation about helping your brother.

The first thing that Danny should talk to his attorney about is how best to close down that stupid criminal case Danny has filed against the judge.

[The Observer]

Thread is too long. and this is a good opportunity to re-start the thread under more civil discussion.

[.]

Never mind. I thought it was gottago.