It looks like the authorities have made their first move against the militants occupying the wildlife refuge in Oregon, arresting one of them who had used to government vehicle to drive to a supermarket 30 miles away.
Kenneth Medenbach, who was arrested for unauthorized use of a government vehicle, is a chainsaw sculptor and longtime nemesis of the government with a history of previous entanglements with the courts over the occupation of federal lands.
He is the first militiaman connected to the armed occupation to be arrested since the bird sanctuary in rural Oregon was unexpectedly taken over on 2 January.
Medenbach, 62, was detained outside a Safeway supermarket in Burns, Oregon, some 30 miles from the Malheur national wildlife refuge, according to a statement from the Harney County sheriff’s office.
He appears to have driven from the occupied compound to a local supermarket in a vehicle allegedly stolen from the US Fish and Wildlife Service, which runs the refuge. The sheriff’s office statement said that law enforcement officers recovered “two vehicles stolen from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge”.
I am not sure how two vehicles but only one person was involved. Medenbach seems to have a long history of taking over government land.
The lack of response by the authorities had made the militants ever more brazen about using government property.
Armed militia have been seen driving the government vehicles around the refuge ever since they took over the site in protest over federal land management policies earlier this month. Legal experts have told the Guardian that the occupiers could face hefty fines and more than 10 years of imprisonment.
A USFWS spokesperson Megan Nagel said: “The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is grateful for the quick actions from law enforcement. We will continue to work with law enforcement to recover vehicles bought and paid for by the American people to care for their national wildlife refuge.”
Meanwhile Ammon Bundy’s bodyguard with the unlikely nickname of Fluffy Unicorn was arrested in Arizona on an unrelated charge that had an outstanding warrant. It looks like the authorities are going to pick them off one by one. Will these people try to break their fellow militiamen out of prison in the grand style of western films?
Last night there was supposed to be a public meeting with the Bundy group telling the community their plans to leave but the fed up local officials are denying them the use of public buildings to a group that is illegally occupying other public buildings.
How long can someone be held in custody for unauthorized use of a government vehicle?
#1: When they are already out on bail for a different offense, and have committed yet another crime? I’m guessing quite a while.
From the linked article:
This is not Medenbach’s first tangle with the law. He is currently out on bail, according to court documents, awaiting trial for a seven-month residential occupation of government land between May and November 2015.
Medenbach was tried and convicted of the same crime in 1996.
Typo in first line: “who had used a government vehicle to drive to a supermarket 30 miles away.”
The way that two vehicles were involved is covered in the Guardian post -- a second individual drove the other vehicle into town and was in the Safeway store when police arrived. Presumably, that person evaded capture.
Onamission5, OK.
What seems odd to me is the lack of other charges upon which which the arrest was made. Like unlawful militant occupation, for example.
It’s clearly cheaper to pick up the goober militia* one at a time when they’re not paying attention. The county sheriff probably has limited resources and the feds don’t really care all that much. No-one at the wildlife refuge needs rescuing. No frackers are imperiled. Do the goobers have much of anything worth confiscating?
*Other terms used include “vanilla ISIS” and the “yeehahdists”.
Once again, cops show have different protocols for interacting with white and black or latino people. One arrest in Oregon, when the clown is alone and easily taken down. It’s reminiscent of how cops handled biker gangs last May, shortly after they mishandled Ferguson by engaging in armed warfare against unarmed civilians.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/5/18/1385643/-No-Police-Brutality-in-Biker-Gang-Arrests
Yes, I am referring to cops as a whole, as a single mass entity. That’s how they view themselves, as “brethren”, so why shouldn’t we?
Argh.
“Once again, cops show they have different protocols…”
Good to hear. These pathetic VanillaiISIS pretenders need to be arrested and face long jail terms for their crimes here. I wonder if treason /sedition / incitement to riot laws might also even apply here?
@ 6. left0ver1under :
Perhaps because its factually inaccurate and misleading and wrong? It is an easy habit to fall into but yeah cops are not some hivemind alien entity but human individuals just as the crooks are. Also of cours edifference police branche scan and do have quite different approaches and policies. Scapegoating all in group X as being or believing or doing Y isn’t really a good idea at all often.
“Won’t someone pleeeeaaase think of the cops!”
@ ^ Holms : I’m sure plenty of people often do. For a whole range of reasons. Did you have an actual point or something?
Incidentally, for clarity, I’m NOT defending all and every police individual here or what they’ve sometimes done.
The cop who shot a fleeing Walter Scott multiple times in the back then framed his corpse = total arsehole who deserves the full weight of the law crashing down on him and a very long jail sentence. Ditto the one’s who murdered Sandra Bland, Freddie Gray and who bashed Rodney King among so many other cases.
But, what I said in #8 still stands and is true. Isn’t it? If not then why not?
Yes all, partly because yes ALL police unions. And the fact that the number of cops who report their brethren for illegal or unbecoming activities is entirely miniscule so the silent become the complicit. So yeah, all except for like… 3 who are subsequently hounded by other officers.
StevoR, everyone fucking knows police employees are people rather than mustache-twirling cartoon villains. The point being made by leftover1under is that they are the ones that are banding together when their tactics are questioned, demonising said critic as being anti-police. They are the ones stonewalling when journalists try to make simple inquiries, they are the ones backing each other when lying, and they are the ones poisoning entire precincts with an oppressive culture in which anyone thinking of being a good cop becomes a pariah.
And when individuals or entire precincts are questioned, above all, the police union* calls on all cops to band together at the state or even national level. Their motto may as well officially change from ‘protect and serve’ to ‘police before public’ or similar. The whole things needs change from the top down.
Incidentally, this is probably the only union tolerated by the extreme right -- what might that imply about their behaviour?
Forgot to mention: StevoR, you remind me of the ‘ALL live matter’ crowd. You ignore the problem being highlighted when it suits your authoritarian streak.
What is he, Doctor Evil or something? I’m sure that’s how he’d like to think of himself, but if you must call him an “n” word, wouldn’t “nuisance” be more apposite?
Break up police unions, ’nuff said… and generally I’m pro-union.
Also, not happening.
Holms (#13) --
Was the socipath replying to me? I don’t read his trolls, I scroll past and don’t waste the effort.
@ ^ left0ver1under : Who is this “sociopath” you refer to? It certainly can’t be me since I’m not one -- nor am I a troll.
Don’t you think those you disagree with might sometimes raise some valid points and issues that you may not have thought of? Don’t you think it might be a better idea for you to learn from those disagree with you and engage with them rather than merely confining yourself to your personal echo chamber of no dissenting views allowed?
@14. Holms : I support the Black Lives Matter and disagree with the “All Lives matter”* thing in relation to that. Think I’ve made that very clear in my comments here even in this thread -- see my comment #11 among others.
* Because as GeekAesthete put it here :
http://fusion.net/story/170591/the-next-time-someone-says-all-lives-matter-show-them-these-5-paragraphs/
what BLM is really saying is that Black Lives Matter too among other points.
@ 8 StevoR
That’s odd. Based on previous comments I thought you were down with people claiming a God given right to take over other people’s land by force of arms and thumb their noses at the law. Are you anti-rancherist or something?
Don’t you accept that ranchers are as human and individuals as you and I and everyone else is?
Don’t you think that ranchers have the right to decide their own future and live where and how they choose to do so? Based on what is important to them? In peace and security as everyone human would wish for themselves?
If you prick them do they not bleed?
(/sarcasm)
#17
Yes, on the ‘brethren’ point. He tries again at #18, but I’ll handle it…
In the general case, yes. In the specific case of you, no, and yes we have tried.
You say that, but then your comments here in defense of cops pretty much mirror the ‘all lives matter’ crowd. So, shoosh.
@ ^ Silentbob : Totally , totally different situation -- comparing Israel and the Yeehawdis are like comparing apples and empty chip packets.
@20. Holms : Clearly you haven’t actually read my comments then because fact is they don’t do what you seem to think they do. Take off your blinkers and read what I actually wrote.
I’m sure it pleases you to pretend your detractors never actually read your comments, but that is rather like the christian claiming one can only be an atheist without reading the bible, and if the atheist only bothered to read it they would be converted immediately by virtue of the sheer brilliance contained within. We have read your shit, and disagree with you because we have done so.