Posted on 01/07/2017 4:00:07 AM PST by Nextrush
Marcus Mumford, Ammon Bundy's lawyer who U.S. marshals tackled and stunnded with a Taser gun in federal court the day his client was acquitted, returned to the same courtroom Friday...
His attorney, Michael Levine, entered a not guilty plea on Mumford's behalf to charges of failing to comply with the lawful direction of a federal police office and impeding or disrupting official government duties...
maximum penalty for each offense is 30 days in custody and a $5,000 fine.
Mumford was arrested Oct. 27 shortly after the judge announced the jury's verdict..........
Deputy marshals tackled Mumford as he questioned the government's authority to continue to hold Bundy on federal charges pending in Nevada and demanded to see paperwork to back it up.
"What happened here is an unprecedented attack on the defense bar," Levine said.....
He called the use of stun gun and Mumford's arrest "outrageous"....
Oregon's federal public defender Lisa Hay, wearing a "FREE MARCUS MUMFORD" button on her blazer, other defense attorneys from the Bundy case and court staff crowded into the courtroom....
Hay said she came to show her support for a defense attorney who was "physically assaulted while advocating for his client in the courtroom and not in disobedience of any judicial order."
Judges can find attorneys or others in contempt of court, but Hay called it an "abuse of power" for defense lawyers to face physical force from marshals.....
Defense lawyer Matthew Schindler.... said he came to court Friday to support his friend....he also introduced himself to the federal prosecutor handling the case and volunteered to be interviewed because he said what the marshals wrote in the probable cause statement about what occurred was false.
"To the extent someone says Marcus Mumford took a fighting stance, they're lying. That's a fact," Schindler said.
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
>>That does not answer my question. My question was “Why do people, who will not use them to protect themselves and family, carry guns in the first place?”
Your question said “sue” not “use” and I did answer the question as it was typed. Since this is a thread about a courtroom incident, it follows that a question about lawsuits had some relevance.
In answer to the question that you meant to ask before the typo changed everything is this: do you know people who carry a gun and say that they would not use it?
I’ll say that every defensive use of a firearm is not a simple one variable equation. Obviously, the number of relevant variables goes down considerably when you are protecting yourself or family, but I’m not going to try and take a sniper shot with my concealable handgun from across a crowded restaurant because someone is holding a gun on the cashier.
It’s like the claim that “if I draw this gun, someone’s gonna die”. Most defensive uses of firearms do not involve a shot being fired.
There’s a lot of variables to consider and a smart concealed carrier considers them all before using a weapon. But I don’t anyone who goes to the trouble to carry a concealed handgun while stating that they would never use it.
>>Try querying the names John Perry, Josie Wells and Pat Carothers while you’re at it.
Hiding behind the badge of dead cops to justify the actions of bad cops is getting tiresome these days. Most cops, almost all in fact, are good people, but 6 cops against one unarmed attorney that required a Taser is excessive and Perry, Wells, and Carothers don’t excuse that—unless the attorney had something to do with killing them.
Im baffled at their justification for tazering a defense lawyer in a court room against the orders of the presiding judge on the bench.
This was nothing but a beat down.
My comment would be, just who is in charge in a courtroom as long as nothing untoward has occurred? If memory serves it is the Judge, and the Judge was overruled. Frankly, were I the judge, those “boys” would be looking for a new job.
Yes, yes, and YES!
agree
Of course it stinks.
It is something that should cause US Marshalls and US Prosecutors to be punished for abusing.
Donald Trump! Please replace US Prosecutors. Clean out abusive ComDem Federal Agents.
None of these people are Josie Wells.
I traveled for a living for over 30 years.
2 times in my life I had to produce a weapon. Neither time did I have to use it. Both times producing it ended a serious direct threat to my life. But it is true, one should never produce a weapon unless you are prepared to use it.
I don’t carry on my person. No longer travel for a living. Have never had a concealed weapons permit. And hope the state of Texas finally approves Constitutional Carry.
(In Texas it is legal to carry a handgun in the glove box without having a concealed weapons permit)
“The US Marshals had no written detainer”
That’s not the information I have. Where did you get that?
“Hiding behind the badge of dead cops”??
You miss the point. The USMS isn’t an agency that’s limited to bailiff duty. The agency is on the front lines on a daily basis dealing with the worst of the worst violent offenders. The article attempts to throw the term “federal marshals” in the American bag as “jack booted thugs” and that attitude on this forum and others is getting old. ThAT was my point.
Your comment was a personal insult as I knew EACH of those men personally. I’m not hiding behind a damn thing. Monday morning quarterbacks routinely seem to miss that.
You don’t know them and you didn’t know Josie.
Didn’t realize you were there.
I sure hope they had their brown shirts pressed and jack boots polished that day/ sarc.
There’s nothing wrong with the jobs you did, but the judge directed the marshals to stand back right before they acted against Mr. Mumford.
The judge needs to be allowed to say ‘contempt of court’ but she wasn’t here. The marshals took ‘the law into their own hands’ violating the rules of the courtroom, the judge is in charge and deals with the lawyer’s behavior through making a ruling.
You use the ‘liberal media’ argument to deflect from what really objectively happened in the courtroom as stated by witnesses like the defense lawyers for the defendants in the courtroom and Mr. Mumford, Ammon Bundy’s defense lawyer.
Who wouldn’t want to taze a lawyer, ANY lawyer? A sleeper hold may have been a little less dramatic to shut him up though.
At no time did they produce written documentation in that courtroom of a detainer on Ammon Bundy.
They claimed it was at their office, but no one saw it.
I commend your service. What if the same rules applied to the Africans and their allies trashing so many cities with their rioting, looting and arson. 90% of them walk away with property and serious felonies under their belts. Ask who are the worse criminals, Bundy et al or the liberals trashing, looting and burning property.
>>Your comment was a personal insult as I knew EACH of those men personally. I’m not hiding behind a damn thing.
Then you insult their memory by using their deaths as justification for anything other than bringing their killers to final justice. Be careful. Be vigilant. But don’t be an occupying army.
>>You miss the point. The USMS isn’t an agency that’s limited to bailiff duty. The agency is on the front lines on a daily basis dealing with the worst of the worst violent offenders.
I’m aware of what the USMS does. But, in this case, they were on bailiff duty. They weren’t escorting dangerous prisoners or taking down the worst offenders. This was an attorney in a courtroom who was acting inappropriately. Did they really fear for their lives (all 6 of them) or for the judge’s safety?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.