No, that's not all the charges flow from. He was arrested for threatening an FBI agent and his family. That's what the initial indictment was about: http://freebarrettbrown.org/files/bb_indictment.pdf.
It gets good on page 4-6.
It gets good on page 4-6.
The threats were stupid but most were of the vein "How would you like it if someone went after your family?" And none of the threats were really credible.
ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND TWELVE MONTHS IN PRISON.
And that's not even everything such a penalty would entail: http://www.scribd.com/doc/132408951/Karen-McCutchin-Plea-Agr...
* c. a mandatory term of supervised release of not more than 1 years, which must follow any term of imprisonment. If McCutchin violates the conditions of supervised release, she could be imprisoned for the entire term of supervised release;
* f. costs of incarceration and supervision; and
* g. forfeiture of property
But I'm sure this is all about the videotaped threats he made against agent Smith and his family after months of harassment by federal officials who engaged in similar behaviour. You know, the same agent who was responsible for making the case for the gag order to the judge. This has nothing to do with snuffing out someone who's not only been a major pain in the ass for the military industrial complex for years now, but has been quite ostentatious about it too. Literally nothing.
Don't get me wrong. It is criminal to threaten others like that and he should face punishment for doing so. Of course, he's already been imprisoned for longer than what a reasonable sentence for such a crime would be. But if you watch those three videos in their entirety, you'll see that there is an interesting question behind the haze of giddy panic that bubbles just below the surface of his outward frustrations and ramblings.
The video speaks for itself. Unless it doesn't (my memory is far from perfect）
I don't get it. All the coverage I've been seeing about Brown suggests he's been indicted somehow for identity theft. There's nothing about identity theft in here. Is there a second indictment I'm not seeing?
http://freebarrettbrown.org/files/bb_indictment3.pdf
That one relates to concealment of evidence, and corruptly concealing evidence, in relation to the hiding of laptops at some point either before or during the execution of a search warrant.
All in all, he is not the most sympathetic of figures, but it doesn't mean the government gets a free pass.
If I say, "Jim is a dirtbag, I'm going to expose him and his whole dirty family," what have I done? It sounds like I'm just an investigative journalist with delusions of being good at my job and who probably has a personal grievance with Jim.
I happen to not be a fan of the individual in this case, but it's important to be realistic about the whole business of threats against reputation.
Whether the charge is distribution of stolen information or threatening a federal authority, does the Defendant have the right to defend himself publicly in the media? For example George Zimmerman did Fox News interviews prior to trial (and did not have to testify as a result). Obviously this can be distinguished from the Martha Stewart case where she used media to maintain her innocence for the insider trading charges and she was subsequently charged with artificially maintaining the price of her own Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc.(MSLO) stock vis-a-vis here "innocence media campaign", although the commercial speech standard was applied in this instance. Thoughts?