U.S. Attorney steps up case against Reese family by going over judge’s head

The whole persecution reeks of totalitarian tactics. The entire family jailed for nearly a year and a half, without bond, on paperwork violations. All of their assets (a couple of million in property and inventory) impounded so that they could not hire attorneys. Numerous bogus charges brought in order to intimidate a plea bargain. The prosecutors should be on trial here. Dean Weingarten

Stung by reversals in his office’s prosecution of the Reese family and mindful that scrutiny for his role in that case could derail his elevation to the federal bench, U.S. Attorney for the District of New Mexico Kenneth J. Gonzales filed three documents yesterday with the intent of denying a defense motion to dismiss outstanding counts and compel prosecutors to testify at an evidentiary hearing, and also to go over the head of U.S. District Court Judge Robert C. Brack.

“Notice is hereby given that the United States of America, plaintiff in this case, appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ' 3731, from the Court’s Memorandum Opinion and Order (Doc. 404) entered on February 1, 2013, in which the Court granted the defendants’ motion for new trial on the counts of which the jury had found them guilty,” Gonzales wrote in a Notice of Appeal.

The second document, the United States’ Response in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice the Four Remaining Counts of the Indictment Based on Brady/Giglio Violations urges “The Court should deny the motion to dismiss and should do so without granting an evidentiary hearing.” The basic reasons they give, translated from arcane legalese, are they say they didn’t do anything wrong on purpose, what they did do wrong was just negligence because there were things they didn’t know, when they found out they’d messed up they tried to fix it, they’ve set up controls to keep it from happening again, and none of this warrants dismissal of the case. Plus they don't want to have to be questioned under oath about it.

Source