U.S. Marshals' tackling of Ammon Bundy's lawyer creates buzz in legal community
Fallout from the Bundy trial.
Important article for all of us...
Thanks, Arthur.
Posted on 10/29/2016 1:46:56 PM PDT by abb
When U.S. Marshals physically subdued attorney Marcus Mumford at the finale of the Oregon militants' trial, the encounter created a buzz across the legal community with experts saying they'd never seen anything similar happen before.
Marshals tackled and used a Taser on Mumford, Ammon Bundy's defense lawyer, following the Oregon standoff leader's acquittal in the federal conspiracy case Thursday. The agency said in a news release Friday that Mumford had become "upset and aggressive" in court after the jury verdict.
The federal agency is conducting a review of the marshals' actions, according to Thadd Baird, supervising deputy of the U.S. Marshals Service. But he declined to discuss any further specifics about the highly unusual use of force.
"The overwhelming consensus in legal circles is that any kind of altercation between law enforcement and lawyers in a courtroom is virtually unheard of," said Kateri Walsh, spokeswoman for the Oregon State Bar. "It just doesn't happen."
Mumford had been arguing that his client should be released from custody immediately, but U.S. District Judge Anna J. Brown said Bundy had a hold on him from a pending federal indictment in Nevada.
Mumford yelled at the judge, and suddenly six to seven marshals closed in on him, surrounding the attorney at the defense table. The judge told them to move back, but soon after, the marshals grabbed Mumford.
They yelled at Mumford to stop resisting while the judge ordered everyone out of the courtroom.
The encounter was the culmination of a trial that included several contentious moments between Mumford and Brown. At one point last month, Brown threatened Mumford with contempt of court if he continued asking questions about the fatal police shooting of Robert "LaVoy" Finicum.
The Marshals service provides security in U.S. District Court. Mumford was arrested Thursday by the Federal Protective Service, part of the Department of Homeland Security. He was cited on accusations of failing to comply with a federal lawful order and causing a disturbance and given a Jan. 6 court date.
Mumford was released from custody nearly two hours later and spoke to reporters outside the federal courthouse. One asked whether Mumford believed the marshals acted appropriately.
"No!" the Utah-based attorney replied. He could not be reached for comment Friday.
The description of Thursday's events also led other lawyers to question whether the marshals had been too heavy-handed.
"My understanding is he just raised his voice," said Carrie Leonetti, a University of Oregon law professor who previously worked as a federal public defender in California.
Leonetti said the marshals likely considered the number of people in the courtroom before taking action, but also questioned their using a weapon against the lawyer.
"They need to be proportional to the threat," she said.
Leonetti said it would be more common for an attorney who wasn't following orders to be held in contempt, not taken down.
"I cannot think of a time when courtroom security officers have used force against a lawyer," she said.
Leonetti said the marshals' actions have an "unfortunate appearance of retaliation," but she believes their response came from training.
"The optics of tackling the lawyer who won – the optics of that are unfortunate in any situation," Leonetti said.
Tung Yin, a Lewis & Clark Law School professor, also said he'd never heard of force being used against an attorney in court.
"I would say it is multiple standards of deviation away from the norm," he said.
Yin said the courtroom scene appeared to highlight how invested Mumford had become in his client's case – he shouted arguments instead of putting them in writing.
Prisoners in Nevada, at least, were paying attention, according to Deb Jordan, a self-described advocacy journalist who is the girlfriend and business partner of Pete Santilli.
Santilli was initially charged in the Oregon standoff case, but prosecutors dropped their conspiracy indictment against him the day before trial. He has a pending case in Nevada and is being held in jail there.
Jordan said she spoke to Santilli about how the inmates in Nevada reacted to authorities using a Taser on and arresting Mumford.
"They all just started laughing," she said. "Fight to the end! Never say die! It's been such a circus from the beginning. They just kind of chuckled and said, "Perfect ending.'"
Maxine Bernstein and Carli Brosseau of The Oregonian/OregonLive contributed to this report.
-- Rebecca Woolington
rwoolington@oregonian.com
503-294-4049; @rwoolington
I agree.
U.S. Marshals' tackling of Ammon Bundy's lawyer creates buzz in legal community
Fallout from the Bundy trial.
Important article for all of us...
Thanks, Arthur.
Thank you, Lucy.
It’s tough to get attention on this during the election, but frankly it should be a winning issue for anti-democrats.
It would totally blindside the left.
With all due respect, WHY would the “marshals” be worried about the judges safety when she told THEM to “step back”?
From existing information, there is nothing to suggest that her safety was in jeopardy ergo there is no information available to support your conclusion............. unless you have some info the rest of us don’t?
On Lavoy, I agree with you that some of his actions were dubious. But, to “protest” something by implication means you have to somehow get the authorities attention. So, I don’t think he was “a fool”. Your “suicide by cop” statement seems overly assertive as well since the feds destroyed or removed the sound in the video to cover up their effort to hide what a lot of us think was outright murder. Hopefully “the sound” surfaces some how some way.
If he had did that[made a furtive move] bullets would have started flying as every Marshall would have emptied his magazine in the general direction of the lawyerand some would have reloaded.
RE: Your first two sentences. You are joking, correct?
In the article, it says that in the federal court system, the Marshalls are the bailiffs. But they still should have followed the judge’s orders.
I present my kooky tinfoil:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3483354/posts?page=3#3
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3485019/posts
US Official: Russia Might Shoot Down US Aircraft In Syria
I referred to it as a Kangaroo Court. But it is essentially the same thing. The Marshalls taught that lawyer noy to interrupt the status quo and they sent a message at the same time what happens to future defense lawyers what will happen to them should they do their job.
It shows how far we have down we have sank as a Nation because not even the King of England would interfere with a defense attorney [Barrister] doing his duty.
We were once a Constitutional Republic. Do we have the will to do what it takes to get it back? Or will we slink cowering into the chains of slavery?
Of course not. The appropriate action for the Court to take is to hold a hearing to review the matter, and if appropriate based on the evidence, impose sanctions on the offending party. The Court has wide latitude to do so.
But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.
Like I said, unless it all happened in a microsecond, she could have stopped them a second time.
The recorder's notes should have the whole thing.
And I suspect that you are correct.
I won’t be alive that long. I will be one of the first they kill because I am not going into one of Hillary’s camps.
They do not want the same thing to happen to them.
Under orders from Obama?
I get the sense it was retaliation too going all the way to the top.
Hey the FBI just got away with murder in all of this. They won’t get a scratch from this.
“Every liberal is the brutal totalitarian thug.”
Well, they try to be. Had a gang of fat, low IQ fascist SEIU thugs who tried to disrupt our Tea Party meeting in 2009. When confronted, they ran into a building and locked themselves inside. Then they cried like little girls for the cops to rescue them.
So sad.
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.