AGD wrote:So he was sitting in front of a laptop every day the past 4 month.
Nope.
...Third, in terms of arrangements made for the
defendant's expeditious review at the MDC in Brooklyn, I had a
lengthy conversation earlier with counsel there. They are
willing to do for Mr. Clark what they do extremely, extremely
rarely but what they did in the Ulbricht case, which is mindful
of the voluminous nature of the discovery, they are prepared to
essentially give him access seven days a week to a laptop that
has been loaded up with the discovery materials. That is not
the norm. They made very clear that administratively that
creates certain additional burdens for them but they have
committed to us that they will do that. And the hours -- it is
a considerable number of hours and it is access seven days per
week.
Just by way of comparison, typically, so when it is
not the exceptional case, my understanding is when a defendant
needs to review discovery on a drive, they typically get access
three hours or so per week, not seven days per week, but they
have committed to doing that. So I have informed defense
counsel that if she can provide us with a laptop, we will
either load up the laptop or load up a second set of drives and
together we can get that over to the MDC so that the defendant
can begin reviewing the voluminous materials.
THE COURT: All right. Thank you for that report,
Mr. Neff.
Ms. Carvlin, how much time would you like to review
these matters with your client in order to determine what
motions, if any, you would like to make?
MS. CARVLIN: Boy, Judge, that is a difficult question
to answer standing here. Obviously, when I hear 7 to 8
terabytes, that leads to the thought of months and months and
months of dedicated activity. Obviously, I'm very appreciative
of the MDC's willingness to accommodate in this case, and the
idea that Mr. Clark will have access to the materials on his
own at pretty much whenever he would like is going to be hugely
helpful but I also have to review them.
So what I would suggest, Judge, is coming back to the
Court perhaps in the fall. By then I will have an idea of what
progress I have been making. I will also -- I'm confident I
can work with Mr. Neff to determine -- excuse me, to identify
sort of the areas to begin with. So I would say three months
would be a good starting point.
THE COURT: All right. September 20 at 12 noon.
MS. CARVLIN: That is good, your Honor. Thank you.
I cannot speak to that, but what I can tell you is this...
The federal prisons in these United States have been on lockdown for the past couple of months so inmates are pretty restricted as to what they can do, and where they can go.
Something about a prison strike.
You can google it if you’re really interested.
I’ve also got another associate who has also been arrested recently, for attempting to purchase a dangerous substance, from a currently operating “dark web” market.
Turns out the online persona that he engaged with to acquire the means to this end was a “online covert employee” of the US government and when he went to retrieve his parcel from the UPS store where he had it delivered he was apprehended and is currently being held without bond.
GOVERNMENT WARNING: Marijuana use can cause complex thoughts leading to better ideas of how to live your life. Caution, free thinking has been routinely reported with continued use.
Prisoners have little rights against whatever action officers and those running a prison deem necessary. Granted prisoners are there as punishment but much of what I have seen was very unethical and immoral.
You can read about the strike here: https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018 ... son-strike" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
smokebreaks wrote:I cannot speak to that, but what I can tell you is this...
The federal prisons in these United States have been on lockdown for the past couple of months so inmates are pretty restricted as to what they can do, and where they can go.
Something about a prison strike.
You can google it if you’re really interested.
I’ve also got another associate who has also been arrested recently, for attempting to purchase a dangerous substance, from a currently operating “dark web” market.
Turns out the online persona that he engaged with to acquire the means to this end was a “online covert employee” of the US government and when he went to retrieve his parcel from the UPS store where he had it delivered he was apprehended and is currently being held without bond.
So you say, that even though the judge orderded to let him have access to a laptop and all data 7 days a week for 3 months, they didn't give him said access in jail?
AGD wrote:
So you say, that even though the judge orderded to let him have access to a laptop and all data 7 days a week for 3 months, they didn't give him said access in jail?
I cannot speak to that.
I can tell you that the place he's being housed, known as MDC Brooklyn, is described in the article below as "just a place to warehouse human beings" which doesn't sound like the judge's orders mean anything.
GOVERNMENT WARNING: Marijuana use can cause complex thoughts leading to better ideas of how to live your life. Caution, free thinking has been routinely reported with continued use.
AGD wrote:
So you say, that even though the judge orderded to let him have access to a laptop and all data 7 days a week for 3 months, they didn't give him said access in jail?
Judges aren't in the business of granting frivolous requests from defendants and their counsel, so the fact the RTC was granted broad access to discovery materials (presumably against the no doubt vigorous arguments of the prosecution) pretty strongly suggests that such unusual access was deemed necessary in this particular instance for the construction a proper defense of his case. The fact that such access to discovery is highly unusual actually only underlines the presumption of necessity here. Assuming he hasn't, for whatever reasons unrelated to his case such as prison conditions, been granted the access to discovery as the judge saw fit, also suggests that such a denial of such access would set up later arguments challenging the process that included denying him such access. That would in all likelihood in turn jeopardize the prosecution and its case, or at least open the door wide for avenues of appeal or even outright overturn or dismissal.
I was remanded into Brooklyn MDC by a SDNY district court judge about 9 years ago and spent 65 days there. Got a good cellie who stayed with me for most of the time and minded his own business (alot of guys have new cellies every week or two). No violence to speak of, altho I heard some stories
Conditions were harsh but not unmanageable. Mainly extremely boring, only a couple of TVs and you need a radio to listen to them (which I got from commissary about two weeks in. Nothing to do, one trip to the MDC library a week and sleep, eat, shit and shower the rest of the time. Monopoly was a big game as was poker.
Kept my mouth shut and got out of there eventually. Some guys facing mad time, 30+ years and some immigration cases all bunched in together
I really can’t speak to anything with regards to matters before the courts.
In any of the cases involving persons I actually know and associate with cases pending.
Wish I could.
I also have a lot of problems with the way things got to with unforeseen circumstances. We’ve got an upcoming financial crisis that is going to make things a real bumpy ride coming up as the world as we know it now, is soon to be turned upside down, through sanctions on Saudi Arabia and the atrocity they have committed in killing the journalist dissenter.
Things are going to escalate a lot more quickly now as the midterms are over with and Trump is throwing the US into a political circus, if not an all out crisis.
I don’t think this case is the DOJ’s first concern. In my opinion they’ve waited this long to convict, if they need to string it out and ask for a few orders of continuance before moving it toward a resolution I don’t think the SDNY is in any great matter worried about this case over any of the others on its docket.
I thank Giblet Muncher for posting the Pacer transcript cause I got a whole lot of other shit to deal with, Moms dementia, and working the gig economy and having overhead in excess of $20k monthly, I kinda have to remain focused on business.
Let me know when you find something interesting cause I’m prevented from any comments going forward.
Thank you for your understanding.
GOVERNMENT WARNING: Marijuana use can cause complex thoughts leading to better ideas of how to live your life. Caution, free thinking has been routinely reported with continued use.
AGD wrote:
So you say, that even though the judge orderded to let him have access to a laptop and all data 7 days a week for 3 months, they didn't give him said access in jail?
Judges aren't in the business of granting frivolous requests from defendants and their counsel, so the fact the RTC was granted broad access to discovery materials (presumably against the no doubt vigorous arguments of the prosecution) pretty strongly suggests that such unusual access was deemed necessary in this particular instance for the construction a proper defense of his case. The fact that such access to discovery is highly unusual actually only underlines the presumption of necessity here. Assuming he hasn't, for whatever reasons unrelated to his case such as prison conditions, been granted the access to discovery as the judge saw fit, also suggests that such a denial of such access would set up later arguments challenging the process that included denying him such access. That would in all likelihood in turn jeopardize the prosecution and its case, or at least open the door wide for avenues of appeal or even outright overturn or dismissal.
@smoke
Sorry to hear that you are going through hard times. Good luck.
