Dogwalker's defense strategy

[Demosthenes]

It's pretty well laid out here:

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/riley268.pdf

Obviously, he still has no clue what the charges against him actually mean.

[LPC]

From the order:

The Browns have been convicted, sentenced and had their appeals denied. A continuation of their misguided efforts to attack the tax laws is not a defense to any of the allegations against Riley.

That is clear, simple, straight-forward, unambiguous, and correct.

And Riley will not understand a word of it.

Perhaps this is where "Elliot Ness" could be helpful in convincing his brother to start working on a real defense and stop tilting at windmills.

[Demosthenes]

Perhaps this is where "Elliot Ness" could be helpful in convincing his brother to start working on a real defense and stop tilting at windmills.

That's my hope.

[webhick]

5. ... needs all the these (sic) witnesses to prove his innocence and to bolster his defense which entails but no (sic) limited to the following:

a) Prove the Browns did not get a fair trial and were denied there (sic) right to due process,

Translation: Prove that the only "fair trial" is the one where the defendants are found "not guilty".

b) Prove the Browns tried everything to get the Federal Government to obey the law,

Ed says he's the law. So I guess he "tried everything" to make the Feds obey him. Including hiding his his house and holding press conferences and making threats.

c) Prove the Browns were peaceful in their civil disobedience

Only if you redefine "peaceful" to mean making threats, bombs, and firing random shots into the woods when you suspect that government employees are there.

, even willing to surrender,

Unlikely. Ed enjoyed having his cult.

if the law that makes them liable for income tax would just be shown to them by
the Government,

Yeah, and according to the "contest", he wanted people to show him the law and proceeded to exclude the law from the list of things he would accept.

d) Prove the Federal Government was breaking the law,

Ed is the law. They didn't obey him.

therefore justifying the actions by the Browns and their supporters,

"I did bad things because Ed said I could." Is not a valid argument.

e) Prove the Federal Government were the outlaws not the Browns,

According to Ed.

f) Prove the State did nothing to protect the Browns, even though by law they were required to,

The government doesn't exist, according to Ed. How can a non-existent entity protect him?

g) Prove the Federals were out to destroy the Browns for exposing their corrupt ways,

The only thing Ed exposed was his delusional paranoia, his incessant need to be victimized, and his ability to sucker susceptible folks into dying for him.

h) Prove the Federals used excessive force, even coming close to killing innocent people,

Is your taser mark still sore?

g) (sic) Prove any measures taken by the Browns and their supporters were in selfdefense of person, property and Country as well as being lawful,

So I guess you feel as though the CEOs of big corporations who steal money from their employees have a right to hole themselves up, build bombs, and plan to use their supporters as human shields if they don't agree with the verdict.

h) (sic) Prove the Browns as well as their supporters, were just exercising their Rights,

Which right is that? The right to aid fugitives? The right to build bombs around children?

I) (sic) Prove the motives and frame of mind of the Browns and their supporters,

The second you open your mouth, the jury will know you're wacky. Don't worry about proving your state of mind. Just tell them about the ebil goobermint weather machine.

j) (sic) Prove that income tax is not mandatory on the average American,

Not the issue here, dude.

k) (sic) Prove the Government lied and fabricated evidence.

Actually, I think he should be allowed to put his proof of this into evidence, assuming the evidence is actually related to the charges and not an excuse to show Freedom to Fascism or other unrelated nonsense.

l) (sic) Prove the Browns were continuously willing to pay the tax as long as they were shown the law making them liable for such tax.

And they excluded the law from what they could be shown. Again, that has nothing to do with anything. They were convicted, fled from justice, and you "allegedly" helped them while they were fugitives.

Poor Danny needs to wake up and realize that this isn't a second trial for Ed. It's so sad when a man's future lays in jeopardy and all he can think about is trying to prove his cult leader's innocence and fantasies.

[Demosthenes]

Prove the Browns were peaceful in their civil disobedience, even willing to surrender, if the law that makes them liable for income tax would just be shown to them by the Government

In my notes, I have several examples of Ed promising to write a check if the government "showed him the law" but I don't have a single example of Ed offering to turn himself in.

Ed's promise, of course, was empty. He didn't have the funds to cover the check.

[Imalawman]

I have no doubt that ElliotNess (Danny's brother) will try to get Danny to listen to his court-appointed counsel and I also have no doubt that Danny will be a complete idiot, ignore his brother and his counsel and then talk his way into the longest sentence possible. And then he will complain about how unfair the sentence and system is, because it wanted him to play by its rules and not the fantasy world rules of Danny "Dumber-than-dogsh*t-Dogwalker" Riley, where he (Danny) is the hero in shining armor protecting the rights of the people.

Interesting, I don't think Mr. Ness will do anything of the sort. Unless, he's just bullsh*tting us here and then acting completely sane in front of Danny. Unlikely, I think he more likely to listen to Van Meter than anyone here.

[.]

You know you're in big trouble when the judge, while quoting you, prefaces almost everything you have to say in your totally lame and off-point pleading with [sic.]

Or interjects a [sic] into the middle of whatever you were blathering about in your total joke of a motion, just before he denies it in its entirety.

DogBoy and his equally idiotic brother need to regroup. I won't hold my breath.

[wserra]

Perhaps this is where "Elliot Ness" could be helpful in convincing his brother to start working on a real defense and stop tilting at windmills.

Perhaps this is where "Elliot Ness" could be helpful in pointing out to the judge who kept using "sic" to describe his brother's (ahem) "motion" that he is a "grammer (sic) and spell check Nazi".

I'm sure the judge would appreciate the tip on etiquette.

[Dezcad]

Perhaps this is where "Elliot Ness" could be helpful in convincing his brother to start working on a real defense and stop tilting at windmills.

Perhaps this is where "Elliot Ness" could be helpful in pointing out to the judge who kept using "sic" to describe his brother's (ahem) "motion" that he is a "grammer (sic) and spell check Nazi".

I'm sure the judge would appreciate the tip on etiquette.

He might also want to point out to the judge that he cites "Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(b)" in the Order instead of "Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(b)" - as a bonus.

[Doktor Avalanche]

It's pretty well laid out here:

http://www.cheatingfrenzy.com/riley268.pdf

Obviously, he still has no clue what the charges against him actually mean.

Just wow.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.
John Wayne

Well Danny, I guess we all need something to believe in. Even if it is a fantasy.

[Disilloosianed]

I honestly have a hard time believing that, if D the D is really this far outside reality that he can't be found unable to participate in his own defense. I mean, honestly, he can't even figure out what he is defending.

[ErsatzAnatchist]

I honestly have a hard time believing that, if D the D is really this far outside reality that he can't be found unable to participate in his own defense. I mean, honestly, he can't even figure out what he is defending.

The Judge expressed some concern about this issue as well. Both Dogwalker and his attorney filed pleadings declining the offer to have a competency evaluation done. The US Attorney's Office also filed something indicating that based upon their dealings with Dogwalker, he was competent. Dogwalker should have taken the Judge up on his offer. It may have been revealing. It certainly would not hurt his defense.

Then again, the standard of competency to stand trial is a fairly low one.

[Bud Dickman]

http://www.scribd.com/full/2155442?acce ... 4dp88d6gkv

http://www.scribd.com/full/2155515?acce ... mve6jf048e

From Bill Riley's Blog

Friday, February 22, 2008
US Petitions NH Supreme Court to Intervene in Writ of Habeas Corpus

In an ironic twist, the United States Attorney has petitioned the New Hampshire Supreme Court to allow the US to intervene in Danny's pending Writ of Habeas Corpus, arguing that the NH Supreme Court has no jurisdiction and the matter should be removed to the Federal District Court

[Doktor Avalanche]

http://www.scribd.com/full/2155442?acce ... 4dp88d6gkv

http://www.scribd.com/full/2155515?acce ... mve6jf048e

From Bill Riley's Blog

Friday, February 22, 2008
US Petitions NH Supreme Court to Intervene in Writ of Habeas Corpus

In an ironic twist, the United States Attorney has petitioned the New Hampshire Supreme Court to allow the US to intervene in Danny's pending Writ of Habeas Corpus, arguing that the NH Supreme Court has no jurisdiction and the matter should be removed to the Federal District Court

Oh sure, why the hell not?

[Dezcad]

http://www.scribd.com/full/2155442?acce ... 4dp88d6gkv

http://www.scribd.com/full/2155515?acce ... mve6jf048e

From Bill Riley's Blog

Friday, February 22, 2008
US Petitions NH Supreme Court to Intervene in Writ of Habeas Corpus

In an ironic twist, the United States Attorney has petitioned the New Hampshire Supreme Court to allow the US to intervene in Danny's pending Writ of Habeas Corpus, arguing that the NH Supreme Court has no jurisdiction and the matter should be removed to the Federal District Court

Bill "Dogwalker brother" failed to point out the most significant point made by the USA:

4. In the first instance, Riley misconstrues the concept of a state's concurrent jurisdiction to enforce state law within the confines of a federal enclave. He apparently views the grant of concurrent jurisdiction to a state over certain federal land as a limitation on the exercise of federal judicial jurisdiction within the territorial limits of a state, unless the property on which the federal court sits is listed with the New Hampshire Secretary of State's Office under N.H. RSA 123:1. This construction is in error. See In re Daniel Riley , No. 08-1077 (1st. Cir 2008), attached as Exhibit 2 (rejecting Riley's same argument on petition for writ of mandamus in the underlying federal criminal proceeding);....

Once again, the Dogwalker and his brother don't really understand what the real issues or a real defense might be. He continues to believe that the Federal Gov't has no jurisdiction in NH, despite every court and judge ruling otherwise. But that is what you get when you listen to advice from Joe Haas.

[notorial dissent]

While incompetence, were it present, would bar D the D from participating in and being aware of his actual case, plain old fashioned bone jarring stupidity is not a defense. I am very much afraid that what they are actually dealing with is the later and not the former. The fact that he believes the nonsense he is spouting despite actual mountains of evidence to the contrary does not speak to his competence but to the fact that he is just plain bone headedly stupid. I really do not think he is going to wake up and smell the burning tar, until he is well and truly feathered. He has found, at least in his mind, a way to give meaning and significance to an otherwise wasted and meaningless life by becoming the great defender of the persecuted(the Browns).

The fact that both he and his brother still do not seem to have twigged to the fact that D the D is being charged with some very major Federal Felonies, and that he will very probably spend much of the rest of his life in a Federal prison does not speak of much in the way of even native intelligence let alone anything else. He is not being tried for his beliefs, but for actual incredibly stupid criminal acts, aiding and abetting a fugitive, getting firearms to a fugitive, building bombs, and so forth, that if they had been carried through or used and resulted in a death would have resulted in a Federal death penalty.

As someone I greatly respected once said, “you don’t point a gun at a someone unless you intend to shoot him” and conversely you don’t build bombs (generally) for the fun of it. When it got to that point a sensible intelligent person would have bailed, D the D played along and helped build some of them.

[Gregg]

Although an Accountant by trade and not an Attorney, my own "working model" understanding of the "bottom line" as pertains to the law is, "Whatever you can get a Judge and/or Jury to agree with you on" is a pretty good indicator of what the law really is. It seems to me these people seem to think if they win the debate on on their own Patriot Movement blogs that that matters and the Courts are just going to have to come around to it eventually.....
Just what is the disconnect with this nutball? I gather his brother that posts here buys into this nonsense and will not try to bring him in for a landing on the real world, but isn't there anyone this guy has come into contact with in 40 years who can tell him that unless he wants to spend his life locked up, forgotten and with his attitude likely beaten daily in prison he needs to get a good attorney, shut up[ and for Bob's sake, quit trying to piss off the court?

If nothing else, tell him that his little martyrdom fantasy is about as realistic as his legal theories, 90 days after conviction he'll be forgotten by all but a few of his own family, the movement doesn't make many heros out of the people who have proved in court that their theories have problems...

[wserra]

isn't there anyone this guy has come into contact with in 40 years who can tell him that unless he wants to spend his life locked up, forgotten and with his attitude likely beaten daily in prison he needs to get a good attorney, shut up[ and for Bob's sake, quit trying to piss off the court?

Even were there such a person, this guy seems determined to seal his own fate.

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
- Friedrich von Schiller

That quote is so often apt here that I have a suggestion: Let's add the one-word phrase "Schiller!" to the Quatloosian lexicon.

[LPC]

Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
- Friedrich von Schiller

That quote is so often apt here that I have a suggestion: Let's add the one-word phrase "Schiller!" to the Quatloosian lexicon.

Which can be used as a verb as well as a noun, I presume.

But is the verb transitive or intransitive? Which is more proper:

"Danny the Dogwalker really schillered himself with that last pleading."

Or:

"Danny the Dogwalker really schillered in that last pleading."

I vote for the transitive form, so that (for example) Eddie Kahn can schiller Wesley Snipes.