Bundy mistrial draws Sessions probe, calls for broad review – BLM whistleblower memo alleges widespread bad judgment, bias and misconduct

In this Dec. 15, 2017, file photo, United States Attorney General Jeff Sessions speaks during a news conference at the Justice Department in Washington. A mistrial in the federal prosecution of ranch family at the center of an armed standoff against government agents in Nevada in 2014 has Sessions launching a probe of the case in Washington, D.C. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)

By KEN RITTER,  Associated Press  LAS VEGAS (AP) 12/23 — A mistrial in the federal prosecution of a family of ranchers who led an armed standoff against government agents prompted Attorney General Jeff Sessions to launch an investigation into the case and renewed calls for a broad review of U.S. attorneys in Las Vegas.

“You can bet that, suddenly, Sessions is asking, ‘Who’s our U.S. attorney in Nevada?'” Rory Little, a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco, said Friday. “And somebody says, ‘Well, we don’t have one.’ And they put it on a fast-track.”

Nevada has been without a top federal prosecutor since March, when Sessions, President Donald Trump’s appointee, sought the resignations of 46 U.S. attorneys remaining from Barack Obama’s administration.

The acting U.S. attorney led the troubled prosecution against states’ rights activist Cliven Bundy, his two sons and another man in the 2014 confrontation that stopped a federal roundup of Bundy cattle from public lands.

The case has local defense lawyers urging a review of the U.S. attorney’s office in Nevada. Big federal cases have collapsed in the last 15 years over prosecutors’ failure to share evidence with defendants.

“There’s been a pattern of failure to turn over potentially exculpatory material for more than a decade,” said Robert Draskovich, a defense lawyer involved in a $14 million securities fraud case that was dismissed in 2006 and the failed racketeering prosecution that year against 42 Hells Angels members.

The latter case stemmed from a 2002 shooting in a casino in the resort town of Laughlin between rival motorcycle gangs that left three dead and more than a dozen injured.

This week, Chief U.S. District Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial in the Bundy case. She blamed prosecutors, led by Acting U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre, for “willful” due process violations in failing to properly share evidence that could have helped defense attorneys.

The judge cited 3,300 pages of previously undisclosed FBI and Bureau of Land Management records relating to the standoff that should have been provided to the defense and set a Jan. 8 hearing to decide whether charges should be dismissed outright.

She did not mention a whistleblower memo by a former Bureau of Land Management investigator that alleges widespread bad judgment, bias and misconduct during the planning and operation of the cattle roundup as well as “likely policy, ethical and legal violations” by federal officials.

The investigator, Larry Wooten, said he was removed from the investigation last February after he complained to the U.S. attorney’s office in Nevada.

Justice Department spokesman Ian Prior declined Friday to comment about whether the memo was part of the review ordered by Sessions. He pointed to Thursday’s announcement following the mistrial that Sessions “takes this issue very seriously and has personally directed” a review and report of the case against Cliven Bundy.

Myhre, the acting U.S. attorney, said in a statement through Prior that the Las Vegas office welcomed help “as we continue to evaluate the case in light of the court’s ruling.”

A federal prosecutor for more than 25 years, Myhre assumed the temporary top job in March, when Daniel Bogden departed under Trump’s administration.

Bundy backers have called for months for the administration to scuttle the prosecution, which led to the indictment of 19 people last year.

“This is the fruit of 10 months of lobbying,” said Larry Klayman, a lawyer and conservative activist with close ties to Cliven Bundy but wasn’t allowed to represent him in Nevada.

Klayman has sued in federal court in Washington, D.C., calling for a Justice Department ethics investigation.

Bundy supporters note that most defendants in the case served nearly two years in jail awaiting trials. Seven defendants pleaded guilty to lesser charges or were convicted of some charges.

Only Cliven Bundy remained behind bars during trial, protesting his prosecution and demanding a full exoneration.

Myhre casts the 2014 standoff as an armed uprising, not a peaceful protest over federal control of vast stretches of land in the U.S. West, as the Bundys claim.

He says the Bundys led hundreds of people and a self-styled militia that outnumbered and forced armed U.S. agents to withdraw from rounding up cattle.

Myhre failed to win full convictions of six other men who had guns during the confrontation, including two famously photographed on a highway overpass pointing AK-47-style rifles toward heavily armed agents.

Little, the law professor and a former federal prosecutor, said a Justice Department review of prosecutor performance in Nevada will be distracting, time-consuming and could end careers.

“You’re a long way from discipline. But the immediate impact is very harsh,” he said. “Nothing is worse for a prosecutor than not knowing if they have complied with the rules and knowing that they could be held personally responsible.”

https://www.apnews.com/ed90cc81826d4a118a821684293f4812/Sessions-wants-review-of-Obama-era-Hezbollah-investigations

Copyright 2017 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

 

Posted in: Court Rulings, Courts & Trials, Dept. of Justice, FBI, Federal Agencies, Investigations, Judges, Misconduct/Abuse of Authority, Mistrials, Prosecutorial Misconduct, U.S. Government

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 − 4 =

Terms of Use for Posting Comments

Terms of Use

This site (the “Site”) is operated and maintained by Law Enforcement Education Foundation, Corporation (“Company”). Throughout the Site, the terms “we”, “us” and “our” refer to Company.  The words “user,” “you” and “your” as used herein refer to you.

Please read these terms and conditions of use (“Terms of Use”) carefully before contributing content. If you do not agree to these Terms of Use, please do not contribute content. Your use of the Site is subject to the Terms and Conditions found here .

By contributing content to the Site, you represent and warrant that you are at least eighteen (18) years old and that you have read and understand these Terms of Use and any amendments thereto and agree to be bound by them. If you are not at least eighteen (18) years old or you do not agree and accept these Terms of Use, you are prohibited from contributing content.

From time to time, we may permit users to submit content to the Site.  You hereby acknowledge and agree that by submitting remarks, comments, suggestions, ideas, graphics, feedback, edits, concepts, comments, photographs, illustrations and other materials (other than personal information and/or registration information) through the Site (individually and collectively, “Submissions”), you (i) grant us a nonexclusive, royalty-free, perpetual, transferable, irrevocable and fully sub-licensable right to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, translate, distribute, publish, create derivative works from and publicly display and perform such Submissions throughout the world in any media, now known or hereafter created, without attribution to you; (ii) grant us the right to pursue at law any person or entity that violates your and/or our rights in your Submissions; and (iii) forever waive any and all of your rights, including but not limited to moral rights, if any, in and to your Submissions, including, without limitation, any all rights or requirements of attribution or identification of you as the author of the Submission or any derivative thereof.  We reserve the right to remove any of your Submissions from the Site, in whole or in part, without notice to you, for any reason or no reason.

Submissions are made voluntarily. Any submissions which include personally identifiable information are subject to our Privacy Policy found here .  You may not upload or otherwise publish content on the Site that (i) is confidential to you or any third party; (ii) is untrue, inaccurate, false or other than an original work of your authorship; (iii) that relates to or impersonates any other person; (iv) violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property rights of any person or entity; (v) contains any content, personally identifiable information or other information, or materials of any kind that relate or refer to any other person or entity other than the provider of the products, goods or services to which the Submission relates; or (vi) violates any law, or in any manner infringes or interferes with the rights of others, including but not limited to the use of names, information, or materials that (A) libel, defame, or invade the privacy of any third party, (B) are obscene or pornographic, (C) are harmful, threatening, offensive, abusive, harassing, vulgar, false or inaccurate, racially, sexually, ethnically or are otherwise objectionable or otherwise contrary to the laws of any place where such Submissions may be accessed; (D) constitute personal attacks on other individuals; (E) promote criminal, immoral or illegal activity; (F) promote or advertise any person, product or service or solicit funds; or (G) are deemed confidential by any contract or policy.

You are solely responsible for any Submissions you make and their accuracy. We take no responsibility and assume no liability for any Submissions posted by you or any third party.

Unless approved by us in writing in advance, you agree not to: (i) provide or create a link to the Site; or (ii) create any frames at any other sites pertaining to any of the content located on the Site.

We reserve the right, in our discretion, to update, change or replace any part of these Terms of Use for Posting Comments by posting updates and/or changes to our Site.  It is your responsibility to check this page periodically for changes.  Your continued use of, and/or access to the Site, following the posting of any changes to these Terms of Use for Posting Comments, constitutes your acceptance of those changes.