While rancher Ammon Bundy was among several defendants who had their case dismissed with prejudice by Judge Gloria Navarro after it was revealed that the prosecutor in the case, Steven Myhre had engaged in several Brady violations against the defendants, demonstrating that not only is he a criminal but that he kept vital information from the jury of their peers in assessing guilt or innocence of all the men in the case. Now, Bundy is calling on jurors and asking them in light of the fact the prosecution kept evidence from them in their determining the guilt of a couple of defendants, would their verdict remain the same had they been allowed to see that evidence?
Prosecutor Steven Myhre was quietly demoted after the Justice Department looked into the matter, but they have failed to bring criminal charges against Myhre, something that should be done considering the irreparable harm he has done to the Bundys and their supporters, including those who took plea deals and those convicted who Myhre and the court refused to allow that exculpatory evidence in their cases.
Shari Dovale at Redoubt News, who covered quite a bit of what took place both in Bunkersville and in Oregon, wrote about Bundy’s call to the jury. This is posted with her permission.
Ammon Bundy has called to the jurors of the Bunkerville Trial to view the hidden evidence in the case.
It has been well documented that the prosecution team, led by Steven Myhre, kept vital information from the jurors, as well as Judge Navarro.
Navarro, in December 2017, declared a mistrial in the case against Cliven Bundy, Ryan Bundy, Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne. She specifically cited several instances of “Brady violations” from the prosecution, evidence that was not turned over to the defense which could have benefited their case.
An example of the hidden information is the knowledge of government snipers overlooking the Bundy house during the days and weeks leading up to the Bunkerville standoff in 2014.
The indictment repeatedly makes the case that the claims of BLM snipers watching the Bundy family were all lies and fabrications, calling them “false, deceitful and deceptive”.
However, this information proved to be a fabrication by the prosecution. Navarro cited the snipers in her dismissal of the case.
Telling the members of the jury that the presence of snipers was a fabrication of the defense was deliberately misleading by the prosecution team. It was a lie. Hiding the evidence of the snipers compounded that lie.
The members of the Grand Jury used this false evidence to indict the defendants, and the Trial Jury used this same false evidence to convict Greg Burleson and Todd Engel during the first trial.
Bundy is asking the members of both the Grand Jury and the first Trial jury if their verdicts would have remained the same if they had been given all of the information.
If the jurors came forward to view the evidence for themselves, we could ask them for a definitive answer as to whether or not the convictions of these two men are, in fact, valid or not. Should Judge Navarro set aside these verdicts?
To the jurors: Will you come forward and view the evidence for yourself?
Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media