They were invited to speak at a community event and offered an escort by that County's Sheriff to the event. Instead, that very Sheriff led them instead into the roadblock. That is deliberate deception on the part of law enforcement which brought about an adverse situation. That IS entrapment.

not at all, sadly. -- j
.

obey that stupid rule, or eventually you'll be expelled! -- j
.

I speak from good family experience. -- j
.

I view the "entrapment" as their being told that their
property rights -- as u.s. citizens -- would be honored.
the bait-and-switch of which the feds are guilty pervades
many of the western States, and it has caught both
the Hammonds and the Bundys in its trap. . they were
invited to occupy their own land, as well as Nevada and
Oregon land, and the feds moved in on them. -- j
.

do you have a source for the "shot by a State police officer"
statement? . and, j.a., regardless of the legality of a "re-sentencing"
action, it stinks to high Heaven of police state. . there is "legal"
and there is "wrong." -- j
.

This guy was shot by a state police officer while being arrested on a warrant. He went for the loaded gun in his pocket. This is no more "blatant murder" than the death of the unarmed guy who was charging the cop in Ferguson. Far from "hiding" things, the film of the whole incident was released today for your review. The Constitutional provision you are referring to is the prohibition on double jeopardy which generally bans trying someone from being tried twice for the same crime. The Hammonds were not tried twice. They were tried once and found guilty by a jury. The sentence imposed by the judge after the trial was alleged to be unlawful. An unlawful sentence can be appealed. That happened here and the appellate court reversed the trial judge and remanded for resentencing. They are now serving time on the new, presumably lawful, sentence.

They are not being charged with the crime of being on the road at the location where they were arrested. They are being charged with unlawfully impeding federal employees from carrying out their duties. The arresting authorities had signed arrest warrants for the defendants. How the arrest was eventually effected is irrelevant to their guilt or innocence of the underlying crime as charged. Defendants are often tricked into being at a place where they can be arrested. That is not entrapment. Neither does it matter that the officers had weapons at the ready. Officers are supposed to have weapons at the ready when they are about to arrest someone, particularly someone who they have good reason to believe is armed. Entrapment would have been if they had been invited by the federal authorities to occupy the wildlife refuge and then been arrested for doing so. That did not happen.

You may not be kidding.

Jan

They were led into an ambush - a roadside blockade with dozens of Federal law enforcement officers who had arms at-the-ready by State Law Enforcement. That screams entrapment to me. They could have arrested Bundy et al at any time simply by coming out to the refuge building. Instead, they staged a deliberate roadblock in another county replete with overhead surveillance. That's not a simple traffic stop.

Hard to see how they were "entrapped" into traveling hundreds of miles to occupy the refuge buildings, but good lawyers can work miracles sometimes. We'll have to wait and see.

Well put.

once the govt fascists saw that the citizens did not care to defend the resisters, it moved in to eliminate them...

whether a whistleblower (Snowden)or openly resistent, the govt has shown how you will be dealt with...make no mistake, this is a fascist govt...you will be made to disappear or silenced...

what is sad is that thousands did not show up with their guns to defend the resisters in Oregon...

They'll have fun getting a conviction there if Bundy has any kind of attorney. The building is only staffed when the park is open from May to October. And if I were Bundy, I'd be screaming entrapment and excessive force, as well as deliberate deceit by a law enforcement officer, as he was being escorted by the Oregon Sheriff to a town hall meeting.

Not part of the cartel unless they are a "national" bank. (At least that is what they used to call the ones in the fed system.) I don't think that credit unions are part of that cabal.

Thanks for the info, John. I'll go to the site. I imagine that it will be quite busy.

good analyses;;; Thanks; I signed up! -- j
.

I understand -- but it would be a long commute from
tennessee. . the horrible thing is that it's the feds who
are ruining their lives, and the double-jeopardy re-sentencing
of the Hammonds started it. . the nevadans should
never have been involved ... except that they wanted
the platform to resist the feds. . sad sad sad. -- j
.

Correct, but remember that as to the validity of the warrants the standard is only probable cause that a crime has been committed, not beyond a reasonable doubt or even more likely than not. My guess, and it is only a guess, is that the "duty" interfered with is going to turn out to be manning of the refuge buildings.

"Remember LaVoy; Remember LaVoy" -- j
.

the eyewitness account is here:::
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wA18...
-- j
.

it's being ignored by the press. -- j
.

the logic is like grade school stuff -- make an example
of him and no one else will dare misbehave! -- j
.

I recommend gunbroker.com -- j
.