Thing's are moving towards a close with this trial. The prosecution rested today, and the defense recross-examined Leslie Larson and Houg. There will not be any court tomorrow as the law teams cross their t's and dot their i's, and release their paperwork to Judge Roberts. As I understand it, the latest the trial will go is into the first week of April. And I am just now starting to remember who everyone is.
I would like to state at least one more time, that I could get some things wrong. I am sure I have misspelled some names. I've probably confused a few details. I could easily misinterpret some of my own chicken scratch that I call notes. There also have been things that I just flat didn't understand. But this is my best effort to get the information as I understand it out to others. Don't take what I write here as fact's. These are my opinions based on what I have seen and heard.
Michael Rataj, Defense attorney for Tina Stone followed Mr. Sitawa in the cross examination of Agent Houg. The first thing he pointed out was how few of the training meets she attended. And the fact that she most often stayed behind with children, or cooked while the others went to train.
Mr. Rataj went down the list of meetings that Houg had attended and asked him, did anyone present a specific plan? No. Did any one present a specific target? No. Did anyone present a specific place or time? No. At no time throughout this trial was it shown that there was a specific plan of action, target, or time, that all the defendants have agreed to, to attack law enforcement. Or to levy war against the Government.
Mr. Rataj pointed out that attendance at meets dropped as Houg's investigation continued, there were about twenty-two people at the first training session Houg attended. Then eighteen, then fifteen, and towards the end of his investigation only eleven people in attendance.
He revisited things that have been brought up many times throughout the trial. Their lack of preparedness, the defensive nature of many of Dave Stones talks, how the April "real op" was about recon, tuck and hide, and staying hidden. The fact that Stone had said (in reference to when the war was going to start) he was in no hurry, he was content to put another log on the fire and lay back. He referred to Stones talk of a "bicycle brigade". Then he pointed out that none of this had been included in Houg's 302 reports, a 302 report, if I understand correctly is a summary of the agents observations while undercover that day.
Mr. Rataj spoke of an instance where Houg proposed a question to Dave Stone. Houg asked Stone - what if we hit the feds first - fast and real hard? Stones answer was really easy to understand - "No." That wasn't in Agent Houg's 302 report for that day.
At Josh Stones wedding Agent Houg prodded Dave Stone for a target again...Dave Stone said "There isn't one..." That wasn't in Houg's 302 report for that day either.
He asked Agent Houg if he thought that all this information was relevant to the case. Houg answered that he did.
He referred to a conversation were Tina had jokingly said she would have to take one for the team and drink more wine. Houg had suggested that he could use wine bottles to build devices. Mr. Rataj asked him if Tina had ever given him a wine bottle. Houg stated that she hadn't. And I don't personally recall any wine bottles in the physical "evidence". I actually don't recall any physical evidence that was directly related to her. She's barely been in any of the recordings.
I have really enjoyed watching Mr. Rataj present Tina's case. He is a bull dog. He's a no bullshit kinda guy. All of the attorneys representing these people have been awesome to watch. The prosecuting attorney's are very competent as well, I have found the entire process fascinating, as well as nauseating at times. But Mr. Rataj makes things very easy to understand for someone of my legal stature (absolutely none) and knowledge (very little).
His final questions to Houg summed up this whole case from my point of view. There has been no action from these people, it has not been shown that any plan to levy war against the government ever really existed. It has been shown numerous times that when presented with opportunities to engage police in combat nothing has ever happened. And in fact some of the members of this group including Mike Meeks worked in a joint cooperative with local law enforcement in an effort to search for missing persons. These efforts took place in February and March of 2010, in Bridgewater, MI. One month before this group was alleged to be going to war...
In his final questions of Houg he asked him if in his extensive FBI and police training, had he ever had training about the First Amendment, Houg stated that he had. The second? Yes. The fourth? Yes. The fifth? Yes sir. Then you have had training and understand peoples rights? Yes. Then you would agree sir that vulgar speech is protected by the First Amendment? Yes. Vile? Yes. Hateful? Yes. Illicit? Yes. Anti-Government? Yes sir. As always I maintain this is not verbatim, but you get my point, or more importantly Mr. Rataj's.
Tom Piatek's attorney Art Weiss followed . The first thing he pointed out is that when Houg was first instructed in matters of this case, before he ever infiltrated the group, he was told not to base his investigation on First Amendment speech. He was told he would hear things that were distasteful, he would hear things that he would find personally offensive but he was not to let these things affect his investigation. And yet, it seems to me, to be the basis of this whole trial.
Mr. Weiss pointed out that after being so shocked at what he saw (card board tubes, and hobby fuse. And some pyrotechnics in a training drill.) He proceeded to bring a thirty pound bucket of nails (shrapnel) the very next time he came. Interesting point I think.
Mr. Weiss referred to a conversation between Houg and Dave Stone, they were talking about who the "solid guys" in the group were. Tom Piatek's name was not mentioned in this conversation. He then pointed out a number of trainings and meetings that Tom was not even present for. He pointed out that Tom Piatek was not at Dave Stones wedding. He was not at either wedding for that matter. Nor was he present for either of the explosive demonstrations that Houg had so graciously volunteered. And he was not at any meeting were the "April Op" was discussed.
That finished the cross examination of Houg. Much more has happened since then that I will get to. I plan to make another post this evening, and it may take another beyond that to get caught up to date. But my stomach is complaining, and I have things to take care of today that I really need to tend too. I have found it nearly impossible to make it to court everyday, stay on top of everything else, and still have time to write. I have developed a good deal of respect for all the jurors who have had to put their entire lives on hold, and made it to every session of court, and listened to the case. They are not allowed to talk about the trial outside of court, they are not supposed to watch media, or read material relating to the case. They are expected to watch and listen for six to eight weeks, to all the evidence presented. And then in their deliberations keep all that information separate and individualized for each defendant. That's a mighty tall order...My hat's off too them. And my heart goes out to them as well, I have commented on the pressure I have felt just trying to write my own biased opinion of what I see, I can only imagine how much more pressure they are probably feeling in their unique positions.
Anyway, here's another chapter to chew on, until next time...
No comments:
Post a Comment