If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my free Email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
WITNESS DESCRIBES COURT PROCEEDINGS OF LAST WEEK
by Sharon Rondeau
(Oct. 25, 2011) —The following email was sent from a witness at the federal trial of Darren Huff, who was accused by the U.S. government of planning a “takeover” of the Monroe County, TN courthouse on April 20, 2010:
We are now awaiting news on the results from the trial of Darren Huff. Starting at 9:00 AM today he is being cross-examined by the prosecution which, at this point, has failed to show conclusive proof of intent to “Take over” either the Court in or the City of Madisonville, TN and, after that, it will be turned over to the lawyers for summation. All charges are based on a conversation Darren had with a bank teller days before leaving for Madisonville in support of Lt. Cmdr. (Ret) Walter Fitzpatrick. The exact words used are still unclear to me as I was not allowed (since I was a witness for the defense) to listen in on testimony from THE main two witnesses (from his bank) for the prosecution. By the time I was called it was apparent that, through brief conversations with others there, sitting in, the prosecution was building a case for a massive conspiracy. The demonization, marginalization, and discrediting of Mr. Fitzpatrick was high on their list of items to accomplish but this and all tie-ins to the corruption in Madisonville were beaten down by the admirable defense work of Atty. Scott Green.
Prosecuting Attorney Will Mackey, who had me arrested on Jan. 4th of this year, appeared extremely ineffective and most would agree, very boring and redundant during the course of this trial as he, time after time, attempted to show that those in attendance on April 20th were wild eyed, crazy conspiracy theorists… All to no avail. Newspaper articles concerning this appear heavily slanted in Prosecution’s favor.
Defense Atty. Scott Green asked me only questions that related to Darren’s case and, after 30 minutes, turned me over to the Prosecutor who asked very little concerning Darren but 40 minutes worth of questions about the content of my web site RiseUpForAmerica.com.
I can guarantee the reading of the transcript of this case will be extremely valuable to both Gun Rights activists and the “Birther movement” as the FEDS stepped into waters previously not allowed in open court.
While on the stand, I was allowed to ask the prosecutor whether or not he intended to have me arrested again, which brought chuckles to jury members, lawyers and the gallery. However, this case is no laughing matter as it will set precedence for future “Thought Crimes” prosecutions.
Time to pray that the jury will see through the prosecutions nonsense and return a “Not Guilty” verdict.
The Post & Email has been told that the jury continues its deliberations today in Knoxville.
Has the Department of Homeland Security improperly labeled gun owners “right-wing extremists” with the intent of curtailing Americans’ Second Amendment rights? There is no law stating that a lawful firemarms owner cannot transport his firearms in a personal vehicle. Huff fired no shots and stated that he never announced nor intended a plan to “take over” the Monroe County courthouse. TIME Magazine has described those who adhere to the Second Amendment as “armed radicals linked by self-described Patriot beliefs” and named both Huff and Walter Francis Fitzpatrick, III members of “extremist groups,” citing an unsourced “interview” to an alleged admission by Huff.
The interview conducted by The Post & Email of Darren Huff quotes him as stating that in regard to the allegations against him, “nothing happened.”
Fitzpatrick had recently been in the custody of U.S. Marshals in anticipation of his serving as a witness during Huff’s trial but has now reportedly been returned to the Monroe County jail.
Are federal agents arresting law-abiding Americans for “thought crimes” forewarned of in George Orwell’s famous book 1984?
Update, October 25, 2011, 2:15 p.m. EDT: The Associated Press is reporting that Darren Huff was convicted of “carrying a firearm in interstate commerce” but acquitted of “using a firearm in relation to another felony.”
It has been reported to The Post & Email by an eyewitness to the trial that several witnesses for the prosecution lied under oath. The Post & Email disputes the Associated Press’s contention that Huff was “part of the ‘birther’ movement,” as Huff has told us on numerous occasions that he is not concerned with the Obama eligibility question, but rather, his rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
The AP story is incorrect in that it associates the Oathkeepers organization with questioning Obama’s “citizenship.” Oathkeepers has not publicly ascribed to the beliefs held by many Americans that Obama is not constitutionally eligible to serve as president in accordance with Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution. There are doubts that Obama was born in the United States, and his father was never a U.S. citizen. There is evidence that the Framers attributed a person’s citizenship to that which was inherited from his father or parents rather than, or in addition to, the person’s physical place of birth.