Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture
Mar 5, 2022 22 tweets 5 min read Read on X
Update on Jan6 Defendant Being Held Illegally. 3/5/22

@shipwreckedcrew filed another motion:
"DEFENDANT LUCAS DENNEY’S EMERGENCY MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FROM CUSTODY" asserting a violation of the statutory requirement to indict in 30 days that I explained./1
He lays out the statutes, 18 USC 1361 & 1362, and applies them to Denney's facts: he was arrested on Dec 13, 2021 & is still not indicted yet as of today, March 5, 2022 - 82 days later. So case MUST be dismissed.

Link to filing here: drive.google.com/file/d/1b4tyRV…

/2
Before folks say, I agree his math on the 30 days (or 40 if 10 days are excluded for "reasonable" time for transport from TX to DC) is wrong. Looks like he went from the date of the detention hearing instead of arrest. He filed an errata to fix it. Link
drive.google.com/file/d/128tE3F… /3
Ship asks to postpone figuring out whether the case is going to be dismissed with or w/out prejudice in favor of releasing Denney right now & dealing with the legal niceties later. Unusual approach, but it's also unusual to not get indicted w/in the statutory requirement./4
"Mr. Denney urges this Court to Order the immediate dismissal of this matter, and his release from custody FORTHWITH.
Dismissal is mandatory. Whether that dismissal is to be entered with or without prejudice is a matter that can be reserved for another day." /5
"The matter of Mr. Lucas’s liberty cannot and should not wait for another day."

100% correct. Being detained illegally is anathema to our American principles.

/6
"The Government is in violation of § 3161(b). The remedy is not a matter of discretion and there is no “cure” the Government can seek to apply. The complaint must be dismissed.
See, United States v. Hinch, 308 F.Supp.2nd,599, 602 (D.Md. 2004)."

/7
Basically, that's legal lingo for "They got nothing to say."

Nice conclusion:

"Each day Mr. Denney remains in custodial detention is an additional day that his liberty rights are denied without due process in violation his rights under The Fifth Amendment. . . ."

/8
"Mr. Denney should not be made sit in a jail cell even a single day longer while the Government tries to explain away its failure to comply with the law."

Pleading is short, sweet, & to the point: Denney MUST be released & the case dismissed.

/9
Ship filed this as an emergency motion. Not sure what the court will do, if anything, between now & Monday to be honest tho. In theory a judge is available at all times. Still hard to get heard as a practical matter on weekends. An illegal detention certainly warrants the ask./10
The magistrate who's already hearing the case on Monday will have gotten the pleading too, however, & could order an immediate phone hearing perhaps. I once had a judge issue an order for the parties to draft & file a pleading by a 4 hour deadline on a Sunday during a trial. /11
Making the absence-of-an-indictment argument definitely turns up the heat, & as I told you guys on Thursday & Ship tells the court in this pleading, there is no way for the govt to do anything to fix it at this point. The dismissal is require. /12
That doesn't mean the Govt can't re-charge him, IF the court dismisses w/o prejudice but it does mean he'll be released & he will get credit for the time that he was detained for all purposes if he is re-arrested. Plus, it's a bad look if the Govt tries to detain him again. /13
Once Denney is released, it needs to be seriously looked at as to how this happened. Ship should ask the court to make a referral to the Marshall's service at least to explain the absurd 46 day transport. I may write some letters to various offices about it. It's outrageous. /14
If you started with this thread and you want to go back to where the whole thing started last week, here's the link of where to start:

Update Morning of March 7

A new order popped up on the docket this morning. It is dated March 5 (Friday), but it was not on the docket last night when I looked at it last & that was late.
The DC magistrate is now apparently engaged. 😃He ordered the Defendant to appear IN PERSON. (These hearings are being held virtually these days.) That's a good sign that the release is coming.
He also ordered: "The Court further ORDERS the United States to prepare to explain the delay in scheduling the Defendants appearance after his arrival to the District on or about January 31, 2022."

Someone's got some 'splaining to do.
I don't think the courts are going to like the answers that they are going to get (if the prosecutors are honest about what happened, which so far they haven't really been.)
"Well, judge, we thought we could just schedule a second "Initial Appearance" and just start the whole constitutional timelines thing running again."

The Judge:
Per @shipwreckedcrew, the defendant, Denney, is not at a very nearby facility. He's at one a few hours away. I wonder if the magistrate knows that. It will be interesting to see if he actually appears in person.
Further thread on what happened at the hearing on March 7, 2022.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸

Leslie McAdoo Gordon 🇺🇸 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @McAdooGordon

Oct 11
Invoke your inner libertarian!

Step 1: Practice saying these every day:

1. To each their own.
2. So what.
3. Not my problem.
4. Doesn’t affect me.
5. Mind your own business.

Get used to thinking like that. Because for 85% (at least) of things - that’s the right answer.
Step 2: Make a list of the issues in the 15% of things where those aren’t the right answers.

Like protecting the vulnerable from bullies & predators & minority view holders from majority tyrants; free speech, freedom of conscience; US sovereignty; etc.

It’s a short list really.
Step 3: Prepare for what you’re willing and able to do to speak or act when those 15% of issues come up.

Otherwise, roll out the sayings in Step 1.

If we all acted more in a libertarian way in every day life, we’d all be better off & half our problems would disappear.
Read 4 tweets
Oct 11
Be informed & don’t be naive.

DOJ had gotten indictments on Comey & James. And I’m personally satisfied that both are likely guilty (based on the available known facts at this moment) & that their prosecutions are justified & warranted.
That by no measure means that they will be convicted. They could easily be acquitted or the cases dismissed for legal reasons not related to guilt.
There are issues with both cases. (There are issues with nearly all criminal cases.)

They have or will have good defense lawyers. There are factual and legal defenses and/or difficulties for the prosecutors in both cases. (Comey’s more than James’.)
Read 8 tweets
Oct 9
Federal judges have become so used to issuing opinions & orders that invalidate federal agency actions that they no longer recognize where the line is drawn signaling the end of their power & so they fail to see that they blew past that line miles ago.
Any federal judge thinking they can personally enjoin the POTUS (or the Congress as a body either) has totally lost the plot.

Nor does a federal court have ANY power to dictate what/how the POTUS as Commander in Chief directs active duty military personnel, esp beforehand.
It does not matter that a prior order says that POTUS cannot federalize a state National Guard. POTUS has the power to direct already federalized Guardsman from other states to assist in the carrying out of federal law. That’s not an end run around the earlier ruling.
Read 7 tweets
Sep 27
Should Comey have been charged?

As we discussed on the Spaces last night, I’ve been going back and forth in my mind on this question ever since the indictment dropped. There are competing considerations, but I’ve finally concluded that the answer is yes, he should have been.
It goes without saying that both the lawfare & the coup against Trump were totally unacceptable. And Comey is partly responsible for both. That makes him a traitor to the republic. It doesn’t necessarily mean he broke any federal criminal laws in doing so, although he might have.
Mostly tho, the federal criminal law is not designed to address that conduct. We haven’t needed criminal statutes in the past to tell people not to undermine the duly elected POTUS. Thank goodness, in a way.
Read 12 tweets
Sep 27
Will Comey be convicted?

It’s impossible for any competent lawyer to say with any degree of certainty at this stage - either way.

The indictment is not legally defective as far as I can see.

So it won’t be dismissed on that basis.
The defense has some facts on which to base a vindictive/selective prosecution motion to dismiss.

But those motions fail 99% of the time.
The facts may be weak or they might not be. There aren’t enough of them in the indictment to say at this stage.

But even if they are weak, there is no way before trial to contest them. And Comey is unlikely to plead guilty.

So it’s likely a trial.
Read 16 tweets
Aug 25
The EO banning no cash bail in DC may be legal but doesn’t address the real problem.

DC law permits judges to detain anyone who’s violent/a risk to others or a flight risk. No cash bail is only for people who aren’t. The problem is w/juveniles, not adults getting no cash bail.
And the EO may not be legal actually either. I’d need to go back and look at the authorities closely.

But the fact that the feds have power over DC doesn’t necessarily mean the federal executive branch can do whatever it wants.

Congress has the constitutional power over DC.
Congress definitely has the power to override any DC law. In fact, DC laws don’t go into effect until the Congress either exercises its right to amend them or passes on that.

So, I’m not sure that the POTUS has the authority to override a law that Congress has approved.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(