[Ppnews] Eric McDavid sentenced to 235 months for conspiracy based on snitch Anna
Political Prisoner News
ppnews at freedomarchives.org
Fri May 9 11:32:55 EDT 2008
Eric McDavid sentenced to 235 months for conspiracy based on snitch Anna
Thursday May 8th, 2008 6:29 PM
These are notes taken from today's sentencing hearing for Eric
McDavid. The author truly believes based on observing the trial ever
so slightly, reading the defense motions and the recent juror
affidavits, that FBI puppet Anna entrapped Eric. I also read the Elle
article about snitch Anna. One also thinks that the FBI needed this
case to justify their fat budgets to congress post 9/11. Cointelpro
To the goons who work for the FBI, Who Bombed Judi Bari, was it agent
Doyle? Do FBI agents know who Hill and Knowlton is? Who killed Rachel Carson?
First you had to go through metal detectors to get into the federal
building. Then you had to leave your cell phone with the court
attendants. Once one got to the courtroom of right wing Judge England
from the Eastern District of California, you had to again be metal
detected to enter the courtroom. Tom, the FBI handler, an Italian
looking moron, of Anna was present with his FBI supervisor, plus a
few other feds and DOJ attorneys I imagine. The FBI idiots had a
whole row of the seats available, reserved for themselves directly
Persecutor Steve Lapham spoke for the government and Eric's attorney
Mark Reichel obviously spoke for Eric.
Eric's whole family was in attendance, two sisters, father and mother
along with other friends and supporters. Some mainstream press was
also in attendance for the hearing.
Eric was convicted of one count of conspiracy to destroy and damage
federal property based on a one count indictment. Judge mentioned
that he's reviewed the presentence report filed by the probation
officer. Has heard and read the objections by defense to said report
which recommended 156 months for sentencing. Judge mentions two cases
relating to sentencing, US v. Booker an US v Fanfen(sp?).
Reichel argued that Federal Evidence Rule 6060 was not appropriate
and that the evidence code doesn't apply at sentencing and that the
court should consider the juror declarations. Two of the jurors filed
declarations stating that they were confused on when the conspiracy
began and that Eric should receive the same sentence as his two
co-defendants, 5 or 7 years. Persecutor Lapham said that the judge
shouldn't consider the juror's declarations and that they are irrelevant.
The judge then posed to Eric's attorney what happens in pot cases
when many jurors find out that under state law, pot is legal and that
many believe that they wouldn't convict someone for marijuana
possession had they been aware that state law allows people to
possess pot. Eric's attorney didn't think that the jurors where
arguing the law wasn't valid, but rather that the juror declarations
critical of the FBI handlers running amok and that they were confused
at the timing of when the alleged conspiracy began should have led to
a special jury instruction. The judge denied the motion to accept the
juror declarations as part of Eric's sentencing motion, but would
consider the juror declarations similar to character letters
submitted to the court.
Reichel reiterated problems he found with the governments opening
arguments during the trial and emphasized that he is appealing the
judge's denial of a special jury verdict form.
Judge thought that the court isn't bound by Eric's category 6
classification and the advisory guidelines. Eric's attorney raised
that essentially what Anna did and although he didn't grant the
entrapment defense, he should consider the entrapment she caused for
Eric. IE...conspiracy has two basic elements to it. Agreement between
two or more to commit a crime and an overt act towards that crime.
Eric's attorney raised the issue faced in drug cases, where the
government goes for a higher sentence at conviction by furtherance of
the government's entrapment with a use of a CI, so they go back and
buy more drugs to get to the level needed for a stiffer sentence.
Here, if the government had Eric for conspiracy, why didn't they grab
him when he committed the conspiracy and get him then. Instead Anna
led him on and they worked up the case further entrapping Eric.
Reichel raised that the jury didn't specifically state what federal
property Eric targeted, but that the jury convicted and raised the
issue of the special verdict form should have been appropriate at
trial to clarify what the jury thought Eric targeted allegedly in his
conspiracy. Persecutor Lapham said that Eric's target was the
Insitute of Forest Genetics. At this point persecutor Lapham threw
out that these were eco-terrorist targets. Lapham only use the
eco-terrorist phrase this one time.
Reichel raised the issue that he's been in isolation for 2.5 yrs
since his arrest and their is case law for reduction in sentencing
because of the deprivation suffered because of this. Also pointed out
that Eric is a high profile case and because he's been labeled a
terrorist that he will face tough times while in jail. Cops raise
this issue that they deserve a reduction in sentencing because their
former law enforcement and they will face a tough time in
incarceration being former pigs.
Eric's attorney raised the issued to the court that Eric know has a
heart condition and that it's real. Reiterates what he wrote in his
sentencing memo to the court. Persecutor says that the medical
condition is speculative after speaking to some incompetent in his
circles of people at the jail. Persecutor Lapham acknowledged the
medical condition from April of 2007, but says it hasn't flared up
since then for Eric. Sacramento County jail houses federal inmates
and in recent years, the medical treatment of inmates has come under
lots of scrutiny and a few lawsuits have been filed for lack of
adequate basic medical care in the jail. Eric's attorney pointed out
to the court that he wrote the court about Eric's medical condition
in November of 2007 and that refutes persecutor Lapham's denial of
Eric's heart condition being non-existent. Eric's attorney also
stated the name of the person in charge of medical at the jail and
said in open court that that doctor would indicate Eric's medical
condition is real and case law supports consideration of this for a
downward departure of the 20 year sentence.
Eric's attorney reiterated that Eric has family ties and that they
all are present. Eric's family is allowed to address the judge a bit
later in the proceeding.
Persecutor Lapham then compares Eric's alleged crime to that of the
crime of conspiracy to blow up propane tanks by Jeff Patterson and
what Patterson received for his crime with the terrorism enhancement
of 293 months.
Persecutor Lapham than holds Eric's 5th amendment right to remain
silent at trial and at the probation sentencing hearing against him.
Judge says he won't hold the 5th amendment against Eric but that it
limits the judges knowledge of who Eric is. I found this statement to
be CYA. The judge was covering his ass and acknowledging the 5th
amendment, but back doored in an attack on Eric for remaining silent
at trial and at the Probation sentencing hearing per the advice of
Eric's attorney. Eric's attorney points out that anything Eric says
can be used against him should he be granted a new trial.
At this point persecutor Lapham then says that Eric isn't the
peaceful person that the family knows and that he's changed and that
he knows Eric to be a different person. The family is allowed to
address the court shortly following the persecutor's statement that
Eric's family doesn't know him. Eric's mom, dad and both sisters
address the court.
Reichel points out to the court that 3 of the 4 family choose not to
testify at trial regarding Eric's character because they didn't want
to miss any of the trial. If someone is going to testify at trial,
usually both sides will invoke the witness rule. IE..if your a
witness, you can't watch the court proceedings until after you've
testified. IE..Eric' family would have missed Eric's trial had they
decided to testify during the defense's part of the trial. Meaning,
they'd have missed 3/4ths of the trial. It was decided one sister
would miss the trial, instead of the whole family.
Have mention about code or statute of 3553 discussion. Something
about Eric's suggesting a 2 year wait? Unclear what this discussion was.
Judge then brings up this preposterous analogy that he's being asked
to change the law and the level 6 enhancement. Says its not a
rhetorical question he's posing to Eric's attorney. IE...there's the
recommendation, but should he change the law and lower the category 6
classification to reduce Eric's sentence? Reichal didn't ask that, he
points out that is a recommendation to be a level 6 terrorism
enhancement. Judge says that it was congress's intention that this
was a crime with the intent that its a one time offense regardless
that Eric has no prior criminal history whatsoever. No criminal
background, but conviction results in a mandated level 6 terrorism
enhancement according to the judge.
Probation thought that a category 1 variance was appropriate for
Eric. IE..Level 1 meaning he'd face less time.
Eric was asked if he wished to address the court. The judge was told
that Eric didn't wish to address the court because he is appealing
his trial conviction and this was per advice of counsel.
Judge England says the his ruling on the snitch Anna was way valid
and even more so today. Judge said that he can't get out of his mind
that Eric's talk of what he wanted to accomplish wasn't all just
talk; commented about Eric's threatening FBI puppet Anna not being
all talk. Judge says that the acquisitions of the materials by the
four of them was beyond talk on Eric's part. Didn't mention on the
record that the materials acquired by Eric were paid for by Anna and
the DOJ bank account. No that's not entrapment silly rabbit. Judge
England finds this to be an extremely serious offense and it overides
Eric's peaceful nature.
Judge indicated that its a new world since 9/11/01. Judge says that
he takes Eric's talk in the hours and hours of recordings he heard at
trial and points to wherein Eric mentioned at some point, the
discussion about collateral damage to be very serious.
Using the 1984 sentencing guidelines, the judge sentences Eric to 235
months. Says its the lower end and that the higher end of this
conviction could have been 290 months. Goes on to say Eric will have
3 years probation and is ordered to pay $100 immediately and that he
will have to register as an arson offender.
Eric's attorney made arguments that the judge's sentence of 235
months was based on a guideline and wasn't mandatory. Apparently the
judge feels that this was a mandatory sentencing of a minimum of 235
months and that he found snitch Anna to be completely credible. I'd
strongly urge people to read the declarations of two of the jurors
filed for attachment to the defenses sentencing motion. They're
attached below to this report.
Judge England, who bombed Judi Bari? Do you know who Hill and
Knowlton is? Next time someone comes in your court for crimes against
nature, I surely hope you don't selectively give them probation.
Maybe this draconian sentence will deter others for falling in love
with a paid FBI snitch, but I doubt it. Go play Golf with your Bush
cronies and bury your head in the sand on this one. After all Gore
didn't win the election of the popular vote either.
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the PPnews