Smoke and Mirrors 7

   Okay, last Friday I did make it to court, however I had a very busy weekend and did not have time to sit down and write a post about it. You weren't missing much any way. The prosecution concluded the direct examination of Murray, by referring to several more instances of the defendants (mostly Stone Sr.) expressing negative opinions of the Government.
    Prosecuting Attorney Light also spent a good deal of time outlining the "April Op" that the guys were supposedly planning. What Stone referred to as training exercises they were going to do April, in which (as I understood it) the intent was to drop of a small team of men in an undisclosed location, on property that was not their own, and for that team to occupy that location for twenty-four hours undiscovered. Stone also said that if the team was discovered in their location by an unknown person, they were to "put them to the ground." and call for evacuation. He stated to use bullets if necessary but he hoped things would go without incident and staying hidden was the main priority of the exercises. First of all, I would like to point out that this is the same guy that was talking about  how he shot a police cruiser and DNR truck - and they just left and didn't come back. I would also like to point out that while they played the recordings of Stone saying these things, I don't recall hearing anyone agree to follow through with his plan. And where was the undisclosed location? Was it a cornfield or a patch of woods in the middle of rural MI, that you could probably occupy an area for a week without being discovered. There is no proof of anything and a whole lot of "ifs" and "coulds" in the talk they present as evidence. I still have not seen any proof of  "sedition" or any specific (or nonspecific) plan to use a bomb or a "weapon of mass destruction". Talk, talk, talk...
   The defense started the cross-exam on Friday. Josh Stones attorney started, and began to explore the medical records of Dan Murray, however, time was short and and not much ground was covered in the cross-examination.
   On Monday, Matt Anderson and Deb came to pick me up bright and early as usual. We headed out for Detroit, but received a phone call from the Meeks family before we got there. There was a juror out due to illness, and the court decided not to deliberate for the day, they discussed some motions but were not going to  go any further than that. So we decided to abort, and met up with the Meeks family for breakfast in Ypsi at Leo's Diner. We had a nice breakfast, but in retrospect I wish we had gone ahead to Detroit to hear the motions first hand. It seems there were some very interesting developments. I can only say what I heard second hand from asking questions today about what happened yesterday.
   As I understand it, there was a motion for dismissal filed by the defense based on Brady vs. Maryland 1963 here is a link if you would like to read it yourself. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/373/83/case.html It cites many cases based on the outcome of Brady vs Maryland, in which it was found that the prosecution withheld information vital to the defense. And relates to the Equal Protection Clause in the Fourteenth Amendment. By withholding the evidence the prosecution denied the defendant due process of law and he received a capitol punishment when he might not have if all the evidence was presented. He was granted a retrial as far as his sentencing and received a non-capitol punishment. His guilt was not in question as he had confessed to his part in the crime, however, it cites a number of other cases based on Brady vs. Maryland that have resulted in retrials and dismissals depending on the circumstances of the case.
   Like I said I wish I had been there to hear everything but I don't know what was said to be withheld from the defense, or any real details of what incited the filing of the motion, I'll try to find out more. Today, the defense picked up were they left off on Friday. Josh Stones Attorney explored Dan Murray's medical records. 
   The first thing he got into was Murray's substance abuse. He went over records that showed he had substance abuse problems before he ever met Leslie Larson and started working with the FBI. They also showed that he maintained that pattern throughout the period of time he worked with them. Taking prescription pills like Soma, Darvaset, Paxil, and Ambien, while consuming up to two pints of vodka a day sometimes, according to medical records. His testimony in court was that he drank a couple of shots to a pint. He does admit openly to having substance abuse issues, but his statements don't match his medical records in relation to the severity of those issues.
   Defense then went into records that showed a history of closed head injuries. Records showing evidence of twelve concussions. Records showing that he suffered from temporary amnesia, memory loss, confusion, and seizures. 
   They also demonstrated that he had received significant psychological treatment, and has been diagnosed as bipolar. The defense referred to a record of a session between Murray and some type of therapist (it was very brief, and caught me a bit by surprise) in which Murray had discussed his involvement in possibly killing someone. The next thing that was brought up was the fact that he had received diagnosis' of being delusional and having hallucinations and hearing voices and such. I was not clear if they were saying he actually killed someone, or was so delusional as to think he had. Either way it seems like it should prove to be disastrous to the credibility of Murray's testimony. As I said, it was only mentioned briefly, but I get the feeling it will not be the last we hear of it.
   Next up was Tom Piatek's attorney. He made brief implications as to Murray's honesty by pointing out various discrepancies in his testimony. He touched briefly on the fact that Murray had not paid any tax on the money he received from the FBI, when he knew that it was taxable money, he had been notified of such at least by documents that he signed. To be honest I don't really see the relevance in whether he paid taxes on the money or not. Maybe to further discredit his character, maybe to demonstrate the potential for him to be dishonest in matters in order to continue to receive  large cash payments while investigating the Hutaree (to the tune of thirty plus thousand dollars). In the scope of things it seems a pretty minor circumstance.
    Piatek's attorney also briefly referred to a" mock trial" Murray participated with the prosecution previous to this trial. He explored the fact that they might have discussed possible questions that may come up in the trial, maybe possible answers he might give, and maybe those answers might get "critiqued". Murray stated the prosecution only told him to be honest in his testimony.
   The bulk of time was spent revisiting comparisons of the SMVM (Southeastern Michigan Volunteer Militia) and the Hutaree as well as other militias. He cited statements from Murray to the FBI briefing conversations within the SMVM of  need to harden themselves, of needing to learn to "shoot to kill", of preparing for war, of enemies in blue helmets. He demonstrated that members of the SMVM used code names, wore camo while training, as well as back packs, tactical vests, face paint, face covers, military style hats, patches to show achievements within the group, they wore web belts, carried compasses and canteens, first aid kits, and a whole list of other stuff. He demonstrated that they broke into teams while training, that those teams rotated members, they practiced live fire on a shooting range. They trained in stealth tactics, military type drills, ambush tactics, search and destroy missions, booby traps and trip wires, hand signals and communications, urban combat, etc. All to show that the SMVM as well as most other militias train in the exact same way as it has been shown the Hutaree trains. He also referred to a public shoot the SMVM sponsored, a open meeting of militias. If my math was right he mentioned that nearly forty assault rifles were present at the meet. As well as a grenade launcher, numerous .50 cal rifles (one of which they were letting people shoot for $2.50 a round), home made grenades, a belt fed machine gun on a tripod. This was in order to show that other militias were far more heavily armed and had much greater resources than the Hutaree. It was also demonstrated that some members of militias are also employed as law enforcement officers, and share the same anti-government sentiment themselves. There were a good deal more militia comparisons made in order to reinforce this point.
    Piatek's attorney then went on to refer to about a half a dozen meetings that the prosecution had highlighted in their direct examination of Murray. Meetings the prosecution obviously felt were key points of evidence, and simply pointed out that Tom Piatek was not present at any of them.
   Piatek's attorney did not conclude his examination and will continue tomorrow.
   I would like to express again, this blog is only my view on things. I may get facts confused. It is fully interjected with my opinions. It is not my intent to mislead anyone, only to convey my understanding of the proceedings. Please do not take my word as law. As I have said I am deeply interested in this case for a number of reasons. I try to pay close attention, and I try to investigate things I don't understand. I suggest you investigate the facts for yourself and draw your own conclusions. I'd be willing to bet that if you do, you won't feel much different than I do. Some of the defendants talk a lot of shit, stupid shit at that... But the prosecutions case is nothing but smoke and mirrors, demonstrations to scare the jury into a conviction without solid or credible evidence. Don't fall into the trap. Listen to the facts and you'll dispel the fear.