MI Hutaree Militia member pleads guilty [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : MI Hutaree Militia member pleads guilty


TBO
12-21-2011, 14:10
http://www.freep.com/article/20111205/NEWS06/111205028/Michigan-Hutaree-militia-member-pleads-guilty-first-conviction-U-S-terror-case?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE (http://www.freep.com/article/20111205/NEWS06/111205028/Michigan-Hutaree-militia-member-pleads-guilty-first-conviction-U-S-terror-case?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE)

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/detroit/news/2011/dec/07/militia-member-pleads-guilty-federal-firearm-charge

TBO
12-21-2011, 16:30
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/12/hutaree_militia_member_pleads_guilty_to_weapons_ch.php

smokin762
12-21-2011, 16:52
His nick name is azzurlin. It should be a**hat or dumb***.:faint:

Gunnut 45/454
12-21-2011, 17:21
So what crime of violence was he convicted for? So training as a militia is now a crime of violence? Wow I guess just goes to show they will convict you of something even though you did nothing!:whistling:

1200feather
12-21-2011, 18:11
So what crime of violence was he convicted for? So training as a militia is now a crime of violence? Wow I guess just goes to show they will convict you of something even though you did nothing!:whistling:

All of your questions can be answered by reading the article.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

barbedwiresmile
12-21-2011, 18:15
This oughta put a damper on dissent.

TBO
12-21-2011, 18:35
If by dissent you mean planning the murders of multiple people, let's hope so.

Andy123
12-21-2011, 20:22
If by dissent you mean planning the murders of multiple people, let's hope so.

In the end, that is the second greatest form of dissent.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
12-21-2011, 21:02
Not sure why this is in the Politics Forum.

Don't forget it was other, nonviolent militia groups who were instrumental in the arrest of this particular group. If people say there are good cops and bad cops, then could the same concept apply to militias? One bad apple certainly does not spoil the whole barrel.

TBO
12-21-2011, 21:30
Seditious conspiracy

Gunnut 45/454
12-21-2011, 22:07
1200feather
Ah I did read the article and saw no violent crime listed- just a guilty plea of having a gun while supposedly commiting a violent crime. Last I read on this they had done nothing of a violent nature. They were planning something, talking about doing something, but never acted on anything. Thats why I asked the question.

TBO
12-21-2011, 22:11
He was charged with multiple counts of seditious conspiracy, use of certain weapons of mass destruction, knowingly transferring arms used in violent crime and other charges.

He plead to a single charge in a plea agreement.

Straight Pipe
12-21-2011, 22:35
So what crime of violence was he convicted for? So training as a militia is now a crime of violence? Wow I guess just goes to show they will convict you of something even though you did nothing!:whistling:

Pay attention: plead guilty.

I'm sure he'll find some internet lawer who'll tell him how can appeal the conviction.

Gunnut 45/454
12-21-2011, 22:42
Wow seditious conspiracy? I guess we can add that charge to Obamamoa and Holder that's exactly what they did with Fast & Furious!!! Tack in on to the Murder charge!

The Fist Of Goodness
12-21-2011, 22:54
So what crime of violence was he convicted for? So training as a militia is now a crime of violence? Wow I guess just goes to show they will convict you of something even though you did nothing!:whistling:

He plead guilty. That is the conviction. The plea agreement that he signed (and affirmed in court) details the crimes that he is admitting to. The crime of violence was the conspiracy to murder police officers.

Murder, attempted murder, and conspiracy to commit murder are all crimes of violence. In the case of the conspiracy, there was clearly enough evidence that he took affirmative steps in his plot to kill officers that he decided to take the plea.

1200feather
12-22-2011, 05:26
Wow seditious conspiracy? I guess we can add that charge to Obamamoa and Holder that's exactly what they did with Fast & Furious!!! Tack in on to the Murder charge!

It would be nice to have a discussion about a completely unrelated topic without ranting and raving.

He plead guilty. I'm not sure why you're so quick to defend someone who pleads guilty. If he were perceived by you to be a liberal or a Muslim, you'd be in here chanting for him to be executed :upeyes:

Hyksos
12-22-2011, 07:39
Pay attention: plead guilty.

I'm sure he'll find some internet lawer who'll tell him how can appeal the conviction.

http://www.sanduskyregister.com/files/www2.sanduskyregister.com/file_attach/2011/December/Hutaree_plea.pdf

Read the plea agreement, he waived all rights to appeal. The plea has the factual background, the statute he violated, and all three elements of the statute. That should clear up any confusion about what this man pleaded guilty to.

Gunnut 45/454
12-22-2011, 11:39
Hyksos
Believe me I'm not defending these people -I'm just looking at it from an outside perspective. I remember the original photo op of the weapons - NO bombs or bomb making material. Just guns and ammo. They didn't do any actual acts- just training, talk of doing stuff. We have Muslim's here in our country talking on a daily basis about killing Americans -I don't see them going to prison.:upeyes:

Naelbis
12-22-2011, 11:49
There is always one who will cop a plea in exchange for a reduced sentence. Anyone want to bet that his deal was in exchange for testimony against the others?

cowboywannabe
12-22-2011, 12:22
so if somebody plans with another to bomb something or kill a person, thats ok? i think not.

he plead because the evidence presented in a preliminary hearing and the case file his lawyer had upon a discovery hearing would make him look even worse had it gone to trial.

Beware Owner
12-22-2011, 12:26
I wonder if by those definitions our forefathers were seditious conspirators.

Hyksos
12-22-2011, 13:00
Hyksos
Believe me I'm not defending these people -I'm just looking at it from an outside perspective. I remember the original photo op of the weapons - NO bombs or bomb making material. Just guns and ammo. They didn't do any actual acts- just training, talk of doing stuff. We have Muslim's here in our country talking on a daily basis about killing Americans -I don't see them going to prison.:upeyes:

I was not accusing you of defending them. The plea deal is actually rather vague, but it does show what he is accused of doing. Perhaps the problem is the law, rather than the act?

But, if I recall correctly, there were taped audio recordings describing plans to call 911, and ambush any police officers who arrived at the scene. I remember they were initially described as a "Christian militia" sect, but I see the plea agreement makes no reference to it. That was probably part of the initial media hype. Either way, bomb making is not something that a regular militia should be practicing, and it is quite illegal. I understand you may not recall seeing any such bomb making evidence, and I didn't either, but it doesn't mean the government doesn't have it. If you also read the plea, one of the guys was declared incompetent to stand trial, and a paranoid schizophrenic. The doctor said he should be fit to stand trial within 3-6 months with medication. It scares me a little bit because someone who is steadfast in their values and beliefs, even if their beliefs are bad/wrong/make no sense, can easily be declared insane, and medication forced upon them by order of the state.

Sam Spade
12-22-2011, 13:18
I wonder if by those definitions our forefathers were seditious conspirators.

Sure. And the lesson is:


When you start your revolution, make sure you win.

CAcop
12-22-2011, 13:19
I wonder if by those definitions our forefathers were seditious conspirators.

Well, technically they were. They also knew it. They discussed it. They were prepared to hang for it.

The Brits didn't think it was worth pursuing them around the colonies at that time. They gave up because they didn't think it would work out. They though we would come running back. For a generation they thought the United States wouldn't last. It was touch and go for awhile. The Articles of Confederation were a disaster. The War of 1812 effectively sold the Brits on the idea it was over. That and Napoleon was running around europe not long after causing all kinds of problems closer to home than us.

Beware Owner
12-22-2011, 13:35
Sure. And the lesson is:


When you start your revolution, make sure you win.

:rofl: Good piece of advice!

Well, technically they were. They also knew it. They discussed it. They were prepared to hang for it.

The Brits didn't think it was worth pursuing them around the colonies at that time. They gave up because they didn't think it would work out. They though we would come running back. For a generation they thought the United States wouldn't last. It was touch and go for awhile. The Articles of Confederation were a disaster. The War of 1812 effectively sold the Brits on the idea it was over. That and Napoleon was running around europe not long after causing all kinds of problems closer to home than us.

Personally, I think this group didn't have it all together, if you know what I mean. However, it seems like people treat revolutionaries (or at least those who'd like to think they are) as a bad thing, revolutionaries were the ones who laid the foundation to this great country we have where we have the Right to Bear protected and we can speak freely. America has done the right thing by being born, not so sure about what she's grown into.

In seeing things as they go and the discontent with the government and it's leaders in big money corporations, there's some talk about america "awakening" and whatnot. I fear that one of three things will happen, either there will be an armed uprising and either the government will be toppled and one that suits The People is instituted in it's place, or it will fail and it will dominate it's People even more, or there'll never be a revolution and what's rest of the population becomes sheeple, as most already are. Either way, I see a hard road ahead.

barbedwiresmile
12-22-2011, 13:39
Sure. And the lesson is:


When you start your revolution, make sure you win.

/thread

1200feather
12-22-2011, 14:08
Lol@ comparing these ppl to our founders.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Beware Owner
12-22-2011, 14:12
Lol@ comparing these ppl to our founders.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I know they're not very comparable, but you get the drift.

TBO
12-22-2011, 14:26
I know they're not very comparable, but you get the drift.
If you admit they're "not very comparable", then what drift is there?

Beware Owner
12-22-2011, 14:45
If you admit they're "not very comparable", then what drift is there?

I was talking about revolutionaries in general. Don't try to make it more than it is.

1200feather
12-22-2011, 15:48
I know they're not very comparable, but you get the drift.

It depends what comparison you're trying to draw here. Some members seen to have a double standard when it comes to this sort of thing.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

G19G20
12-22-2011, 19:06
He was charged with multiple counts of seditious conspiracy, use of certain weapons of mass destruction, knowingly transferring arms used in violent crime and other charges.

He plead to a single charge in a plea agreement.

Often it is strategically better to plead guilty to a charge than risk going to trial where the prosecutor and the judge work for the same organization (federal gov't) and don't have your best interests in mind. I'm not claiming they are necessarily innocent but when someone is charged with a laundry list of stuff and the case is ended with a single guilty plea on a single charge, it usually indicates a weak case.

TBO
12-22-2011, 19:12
Often it is strategically better to plead guilty to a charge than risk going to trial where the prosecutor and the judge work for the same organization (federal gov't) and don't have your best interests in mind. I'm not claiming they are necessarily innocent but when someone is charged with a laundry list of stuff and the case is ended with a single guilty plea on a single charge, it usually indicates a weak case.
Can you please state your experience and relevant examples?

Thank you

Beware Owner
12-26-2011, 11:51
It depends what comparison you're trying to draw here. Some members seen to have a double standard when it comes to this sort of thing.


Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

I just mean that the spirit of revolution can be a good thing, though it seems that most get it wrong. Personally, I'd like to see an awareness type of revolution, meaning that The People find a bloodless way to put and keep politicians in check, curb the double dealing in the White House, and get Congress to work at least one day a week. Hold them accountable for their misdeeds, and put them in jail whenever they use the government for personal gain. The People need to take back their government, and that won't be done by voting pigs in and out. The System needs to be revised.

TBO
12-26-2011, 12:00
I just mean that the spirit of revolution can be a good thing, though it seems that most get it wrong. Personally, I'd like to see an awareness type of revolution, meaning that The People find a bloodless way to put and keep politicians in check, curb the double dealing in the White House, and get Congress to work at least one day a week. Hold them accountable for their misdeeds, and put them in jail whenever they use the government for personal gain. The People need to take back their government, and that won't be done by voting pigs in and out. The System needs to be revised.
Education.

Knowledge is power.

Too many asleep at the wheel, just look at the voter turn out for elections (both Presidential and non).

I also agree with how Andy Rooney put it years ago.

No, not everyone should vote. If you're uninterested and uninvolved and out of touch I don't want you to vote, all you can do is screw things up.
Do me a favor and stay home, don't vote.

Something to that effect. He was referring to the inevitable (seemingly always the same political party) pushing that "everyone needs to vote". You know, the vans driving around picking up the homeless, the wandering mentally ill, drunks hanging out at bars/alleys, etc, and pushing/driving them to the polls.

Education doesn't mean agenda pushing either.

Perhaps we simply live to high a quality of life now days and that's why the low voter rate. If that's true, sadly things will have to get much worse to get people to go out and vote, much less pay actual attention.

jmho

Cavalry Doc
12-26-2011, 12:09
Often it is strategically better to plead guilty to a charge than risk going to trial where the prosecutor and the judge work for the same organization (federal gov't) and don't have your best interests in mind. I'm not claiming they are necessarily innocent but when someone is charged with a laundry list of stuff and the case is ended with a single guilty plea on a single charge, it usually indicates a weak case.

I can't think of a single reason that I would ever plead guilty to a crime that I did not commit. Period.

That would be a tactical mistake. The only way it would be strategically beneficial, is if there were much worse charges that you received immunity from.

Beware Owner
12-26-2011, 12:54
Education.

Knowledge is power.

Too many asleep at the wheel, just look at the voter turn out for elections (both Presidential and non).

I also agree with how Andy Rooney put it years ago.

No, not everyone should vote. If you're uninterested and uninvolved and out of touch I don't want you to vote, all you can do is screw things up.
Do me a favor and stay home, don't vote.

Something to that effect. He was referring to the inevitable (seemingly always the same political party) pushing that "everyone needs to vote". You know, the vans driving around picking up the homeless, the wandering mentally ill, drunks hanging out at bars/alleys, etc, and pushing/driving them to the polls.

Education doesn't mean agenda pushing either.

Perhaps we simply live to high a quality of life now days and that's why the low voter rate. If that's true, sadly things will have to get much worse to get people to go out and vote, much less pay actual attention.

jmho


Honestly, just voting isn't doing it, voting manure out only to vote feces in isn't cutting it. It's not like whoever is lining up for candidate doesn't already know that he/she can get away with just about anything once in office. We need to put and keep the government in check. We need to establish ways to keep politicians honest. We need to know for a fact that a politician isn't making money off legislations, wars, bailouts, etc., expose their true motivations for what they're doing, and, if caught, they need to pay for it big time. We need transparency in our government.

Jeff82
12-26-2011, 13:06
If he were perceived by you to be a liberal or a Muslim, you'd be in here chanting for him to be executed

That's because we can always use a few less of either. :whistling:

TBO
12-26-2011, 14:29
Honestly, just voting isn't doing it, voting manure out only to vote feces in isn't cutting it. It's not like whoever is lining up for candidate doesn't already know that he/she can get away with just about anything once in office. We need to put and keep the government in check. We need to establish ways to keep politicians honest. We need to know for a fact that a politician isn't making money off legislations, wars, bailouts, etc., expose their true motivations for what they're doing, and, if caught, they need to pay for it big time. We need transparency in our government.

Agreed, that's what I'm talking about when I say knowledge/education is required to correct this.

Sent from Tapatalk

Beware Owner
12-28-2011, 11:43
Agreed, that's what I'm talking about when I say knowledge/education is required to correct this.

Sent from Tapatalk

To begin with, yes. However, thought is no substitute for action.

nmk
12-28-2011, 11:50
Hyksos
Believe me I'm not defending these people -I'm just looking at it from an outside perspective. I remember the original photo op of the weapons - NO bombs or bomb making material. Just guns and ammo. They didn't do any actual acts- just training, talk of doing stuff. We have Muslim's here in our country talking on a daily basis about killing Americans -I don't see them going to prison.:upeyes:

I have no doubt there are people of every religion in this country right now discussing the murder of other Americans. Can you provide any evidence that the Muslims doing this are being given a pass?

Cavalry Doc
12-28-2011, 11:58
I have no doubt there are people of every religion in this country right now discussing the murder of other Americans. Can you provide any evidence that the Muslims doing this are being given a pass?

You are of course correct, but it has happened before. Does the name Hasan ring a bell?

humanguerrilla
03-27-2012, 20:46
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/28/us-usa-crime-militia-idUSBRE82Q16Z20120328

Wow. Interesting. Charges dismissed except for what are described as minor weapons charges in the Hutaree Militia case.

TBO
03-27-2012, 21:56
Thanks for the update, upon 1st blush looks like only Illegal Weapons charges remaining.

Paul7
03-27-2012, 21:57
Big deal, they didn't hurt a fly.

G19G20
03-27-2012, 21:58
Can you please state your experience and relevant examples?

Thank you


Hmm....no? Can you please state that everyone that pleads guilty to a charge always committed that offense?

Well, what do ya know? Looks like the case -was- indeed weak. Don't you owe me an apology?

I can't think of a single reason that I would ever plead guilty to a crime that I did not commit. Period.

That would be a tactical mistake. The only way it would be strategically beneficial, is if there were much worse charges that you received immunity from.

Ill let you in on a secret. Cops lie. And prosecutors trump up charges. And they work for the same team. If you have prosecutors that don't mind trumping up charges in high profile case and cops willing to lie in court (aka "testilying"), then sometimes the best strategy is to mitigate whatever damage may occur from said prosecutors and cops ignoring their oaths.

stevelyn
03-28-2012, 06:14
Imagine that. The govt witch hunt falls flat on it's face failing to bag any witches.

QNman
03-28-2012, 06:25
Thank God for due process...

TBO
03-28-2012, 11:24
Hmm....no? Can you please state that everyone that pleads guilty to a charge always committed that offense? - Strawman

Well, what do ya know? Looks like the case -was- indeed weak. - "Weak"? Strong enough to hold them for 2 years, right?



Don't you owe me an apology? - :rofl:Man, that is really something. Please show me what, in my post (that you ignored from before Christmas last year) that warrants an "apology". Are you a liberal, or just using their tactic of "make yourself a victim"?



Ill let you in on a secret. Cops lie. And prosecutors trump up charges. And they work for the same team. If you have prosecutors that don't mind trumping up charges in high profile case and cops willing to lie in court (aka "testilying"), then sometimes the best strategy is to mitigate whatever damage may occur from said prosecutors and cops ignoring their oaths.In THIS case, are you accusing:



The Cops of lying
The Prosecutor trumping up charges

:dunno:

QNman
03-28-2012, 14:09
December 2011 to present is a tad shorter than two years.

They has their day on court. A judge found insufficient evidence in the case. Cops make mistakes - it happens. Cops are also people and subject to their opinions, prejudices and even poor judgment. That's why due process is important.

I am not accusing the police of any intentional malfeasance, but clearly the judge disapproved.

Cavalry Doc
03-28-2012, 14:42
Hmm....no? Can you please state that everyone that pleads guilty to a charge always committed that offense?

Well, what do ya know? Looks like the case -was- indeed weak. Don't you owe me an apology?



Ill let you in on a secret. Cops lie. And prosecutors trump up charges. And they work for the same team. If you have prosecutors that don't mind trumping up charges in high profile case and cops willing to lie in court (aka "testilying"), then sometimes the best strategy is to mitigate whatever damage may occur from said prosecutors and cops ignoring their oaths.

You take whatever risks you want to, but I cannot imagine a scenario where I'm pleading guilty to anything I didn't do.

steveksux
03-28-2012, 19:41
Detroit feds had another high profile terrorism case blow up in their faces in court a few years ago.

Seems like the feds have a tendency to err on the side of caution in regards to aggressively pursuing anything terrorism related in the wake of 9/11. That's not necessarily a bad thing, you don't want to let the plot go too far. Having said that, seem to be less cautious when it comes to pressing charges they can prove.

Sometimes overcharging creates leverage to ensure plea bargains. Sometimes you overreach and things go south.

Plotting to kill cops, then use the resultant funeral for an ambush to kill more is not what the first amendment is all about. I'm surprised that doesn't support some sort of conspiracy to commit murder at least. Plus the whole plan to overthrow the govt and all.

I'm a little surprised people her are defending these guys.

Then I realize they are white guys that own guns instead of Muslims.

Randy

QNman
03-28-2012, 21:12
Distasteful though it may be, they have the right to say whatever vile thing they want in private. Was it actual planning rather than merely waxing poetic? None of us know.

G19G20
03-29-2012, 11:49
Detroit feds had another high profile terrorism case blow up in their faces in court a few years ago.

Seems like the feds have a tendency to err on the side of caution in regards to aggressively pursuing anything terrorism related in the wake of 9/11. That's not necessarily a bad thing, you don't want to let the plot go too far. Having said that, seem to be less cautious when it comes to pressing charges they can prove.

Sometimes overcharging creates leverage to ensure plea bargains. Sometimes you overreach and things go south.

Plotting to kill cops, then use the resultant funeral for an ambush to kill more is not what the first amendment is all about. I'm surprised that doesn't support some sort of conspiracy to commit murder at least. Plus the whole plan to overthrow the govt and all.

I'm a little surprised people her are defending these guys.

Then I realize they are white guys that own guns instead of Muslims.

Randy

When you read articles like this one (that you have to find on a FOREIGN news site, no less):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/26/taliban-sympathiser-arrest-fbi-informant-tactics/print

it tends to change your viewpoint on this sort of stuff. What you're mostly seeing in these cases, Hutaree included, is professional snitches that infiltrate generally peaceful and law abiding groups and work really hard to CREATE a case that ends up as front page news to justify the police state implementation that's underway (see NDAA) and the humongous budgets that are being passed out to LEO (see FBI's recent budget increases).

Here's the text of the article above since it's fitting with the Hutaree case.


The arrest of a Pittsburgh man described as a Taliban (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/taliban) sympathiser has sparked allegations that the FBI (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/fbi) deployed a notorious confidential informant used in previous controversial stings on suspected Muslim radicals.

Khalifah al-Akili, 34, was arrested in a police raid on his home on March 15. He was later charged with illegally possessing a gun after having previous felony convictions for drug dealing. However, at his court appearance an FBI agent testified that al-Akili had made radical Islamic statements and that police had uncovered unspecified jihadist literature at his home.

But, in a strange twist, al-Akili's arrest came just days after he had sent out an email to friends and local Muslim civil rights groups complaining that he believed he was the target of an FBI "entrapment" sting. That refers to a controversial FBI tactic of using confidential informants who often have criminal records or are paid large sums of money to facilitate "fake" terrorist plots for suspects to invent or carry out.

In the email which was also sent to the Guardian before al-Akili was arrested he detailed meeting two men he believed were FBI informants because of the way they talked about radical Islam (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/islam) and appeared to want to get him to make jihadist statements. According to his account, one of them, who called himself Saeed Torres, asked him to buy a gun. Al-Aikili said he refused. The other, who was called Mohammed, offered to help him go to Pakistan for possible Islamic radical training. Al-Akili also refused.
In the email al-Akili recounted that he obtained a phone number from Mohammed and put it into Google. The search returned a reference to the case of the Newburgh Four, where an FBI confidential informant called Shahed Hussain helped secure the convictions of four men for attempting to blow up Jewish targets in the Bronx.

Hussain's actions became notorious among civil rights groups due to the incentives he deployed on his targets, who were local black Muslims in the impoverished town of Newburgh. They included offering one suspect $250,000, a car and a free holiday. Al-Akili said he also found a picture of Shahed Hussain on the internet and realised it was the same man as "Mohammed".

Al-Akili concluded his email by saying: "I would like to pursue a legal action against the FBI due to their continuous harassment and attempts to set me up." The Guardian contacted al-Akili by email and on March 14 by phone and al-Akili agreed to talk more to the Guardian about his belief that he was being set up by Hussain. But he was arrested the next day and has been denied bail as a potential threat to the public, keeping him in jail.

Al-Akili's lawyer Mike Healey believes that the FBI may have been monitoring al-Akili's emails, and possibly his phone, and then rushed to arrest him once Hussain had been identified and al-Akili had effectively gone public with his fears.

Healey questioned why the FBI would use Hussain, who has also been widely criticised for his role in another "entrapment" case in Albany, New York, which resulted in the jailing of a local imam and a pizza shop owner. "What are they doing bringing him here? I am amazed they would use someone like that," he said.

Yet, despite being painted in court as a dangerous radical Islamist, the only charges brought against al-Akili were for firing a rifle which Healey said was owned by a friend at a local shooting range almost two years ago in June 2010. Al-Akili faces the prospect of a hefty jail sentence if found guilty.

A spokesman for the FBI declined to comment on whether the agency had been using Shahed Hussain as a confidential informant in Pittsburgh.