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
Surely, as reasonable as security cameras are, there was one in the courtroom. Surely the marshals had body cams.
If not, why not?
No. Not at all.
The marshals are the official baliffs?
Oh. That changes things.
Thank you.
Video of interview with Mumford.
But I still wonder why they didn’t just present the defense attorney with the proper paperwork to shut him up in a civil manner. I still suspect they did not have the paperwork ready for a jury nullification contingency, so they resorted to brute force as a ‘delaying’ tactic.
“Surely, as reasonable as security cameras are, there was one in the courtroom. Surely the marshals had body cams. If not, why not?”
I can answer that. This is unheard of.
The defense attorney asked for the proper paperwork:
“If there’s a detainer show me.”
Rather than show him any proper paperwork [which they evidentally didn’t have] they bought time and took control through brute force.
Can’t watch videos from here. Sorry.
Interesting. I figured that the Judge asked for some help to maintain order in the courtroom.
...
The judge was very fair and patient during the trial. She’s a big reason why there was an acquittal.
I think your scenario is likely.
I can hardly wait to see the civil suit that will be filed against these “autonomously acting” marshals and the Federal Government.
False Imprisonment and Misprison, False Arrest, violation of constitutional right of free speech, all designed to ruin the attorney and have him disbarred? It backfired.
He is going to make millions.
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.