On Sunday, October 20, 2019, 12:32:30 AM PDT, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 06:08:02AM +0000, jim bell wrote:
>  On Saturday, October 19, 2019, 07:31:14 PM PDT, Zenaan Harkness <zen@freedbms.net> wrote:
> 
> 
>> >Hi Jim, I want to know - were you ever offered any "sell out" type of
>>> option from the prosecutors who put you in jail for all those years?
>
>
>> The only 'deal' I was given was an offer for 2 years if I pled guilty, in 2001.  I refused, because I knew that the government was corrupt.  What I didn't know, at the time, was that this corrupt government (and a previous corrupt attorney) engaged in a fake "appeal" case in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, case number 99-30210.   Do a Google search for 'jim bell "99-30210".     https://cpunks.wordpress.com/2013/11/19/jim-bell-to-andy-greenberg-your-errors-about-me-in-your-book/  
>> This explains how I found out that Andy Greenberg is such a jerk.  Clearly he wants to avoid covering what would have been a fascinating story, but one that puts the Federal government in a very bad light.  
>> And here's the lawsuit I wrote, until June 2003.   https://cryptome.org/jdb/jdb-v-usa-ric.htm   
>
>>   I also didn't know that my then-current corrupt attorney was strenuously working on the Federal government's behalf, and would work with the judge to prohibit me from putting on MY defense.  The only 'defense' I received was the one the Feds wanted to allow me.  Essentially nothing.  
>> These events are why I will demand a change in the system before I allow it to operate:   Whenever a person is charged with a crime, the government MUST offer a deal, including a specific time of imprisonment.   If the defendant refuses the deal, and if he is convicted, he cannot be sentenced to any time greater than the plea deal defined, plus 10% or 6 months.
>> And, the jury will have to state what the maximum punishment their verdict will allow, and if that is lower than the deal, that jury's limitation will control.  
>> The reason is that the current system forces people to plead guilty based on the threat of far greater punishment than what the government would otherwise be satisfied with.  Take away that threat, and the government will have no choice but give realistic plea agreements, knowing that the defendant has a free choice to refuse, without what amounts to retaliation. 
>                 Jim Bell


>Indeed. High corruption.


>And might we collectively add, damn bro, what a stand you took!

>That was 18 years or something right? Because you would NOT plead
guilty?

A total of about 13 years, from May 1997 through March 12, 2012, spread over a period of about 15 years.


>THAT, is a serious stand for principle!

Keep in mind that I should have EASILY been able to destroy the government's case, if I had known about the pre-April-2000 existence of the 9th Circuit appeals case 99-30210, which I believe was re-forged in about April 2000.  They had faked an ongoing 'appeals case', ostensibly in my name, and ostensibly I was representing myself ('pro-se'), but in reality the dozens of mailings that should have been coming to me were concealed by government agents.  Court people, Federal Bureau of Prisons people, etc. 

 

Completely unexpectedly, in March 2000, I demanded (in a letter to the 9th Circuit) an 'appeal' for my 'probation violation' case.  That, I much later realized, put these government crooks in a major bind:  Ordinary, I would have to demand an appeal within 10 court-days, excluding weekends and holidays. (So I was WAY too late!!!)  But it turns out that the Government was actually in the process of giving me a forged-and-fake 'appeal', which they had been doing since about June 1999, so they couldn't turn around and deny me an appeal!!

Eventually, after I was released in April 2000, I was given a (colluding) lawyer, Jonathan Solovy (Seattle) who apparently agreed to conceal the pre-April-2000 faked existence of appeal 99-30210.   Had he asked even one question, like "Jim, it looks like you've been handing this case since June 1999 pro-se.  What was your theory of appeal?"   I would then have said, "I don't know what you are talking about.  I initiated this case in March 2000 by a letter I sent to the 9th Circuit, demanding an appeal case."    That simple revelation would have blown apart everything.   As is was, I only discovered the pre-April 2000 existence of case 99-30210 in about June 2003.   So, Solovy was a major crook who enabled the government to convict me.  

"OK. So. You have a moral and ethical claim (not yet "made out")
against the US government."

Larger than you can possibly imagine !!!

"You might be familiar with the two documents required to begin any
court case?

- your story (e.g. affidavit, deposition, etc)

- your originating process (Originating Motion, Grand Jury Summons,
  Summons, Claim, etc)"

See my lawsuit, which I wrote over a period of about year, refiling early July 2003.

First claim: