--Previous Message--
: For the Hammonds, clashes with federal
: authorities in courtrooms and in the wild
: over farming and property rights are all too
: familiar. In the early 1970s, Dwight Hammond
: sued the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for
: water rights to fill his reservoir and won.
: In 1994, the agency tried to fence off a
: cattle trail that Hammond used that
: traversed federal land. Once again, Hammond
: sued and won.
:
: “Then the BLM began secretly gathering
: ‘stuff’ against the Hammonds accusing them
: of arson, conspiracy, flying in restricted
: airspace, etc.,” Danielsen said.
:
: According to an NPR report, Dwight Hammond
: was alleged to have made death threats
: against federal officials. In 2010 a federal
: grand jury indicted Dwight and his son Steve
: on 19 counts, including conspiracy to commit
: arson, for multiple wildfires in the Steens
: Mountain area. These charges of arson went
: all the way back to the early 80s – a span
: of over 25 years.
:
: “If it was arson, why did they wait?”
: Danielsen noted.
:
: In 2011 a new federal prosecutor was named
: and 10 of the original 19 count indictments
: were dropped, leaving nine counts spanning
: 15 years. The BLM and federal prosecutor
: decided to charge the Hammonds with an arson
: charge connected with the Antiterrorism and
: Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. A jury
: found Dwight Hammond guilty of one of the
: nine counts, and Steve Hammond guilty of two
: of the nine counts -- the two fires the
: Hammonds admitted to starting.
:
: One was a prescribed burn on Hammond
: property that got away from them and burned
: 139 acres of adjacent BLM land. The other
: was in response to a lightning-caused fire,
: what is known as a "back burn,"
: which was started on Hammond property and
: burned an acre of BLM land. At the time,
: the Hammonds claimed the fires were lit to
: reduce the growth of invasive plants and
: protect their property from wildfires, but
: prosecutors argued it was to cover-up
: poaching.
:
: “Neither of these fires would be considered
: ‘terrorism arson’
:
:
:
: --Previous Message--
: they only burned 123 acres...5 years..(after
: they served a year or something like
: that)..seems like double jepordy....bet
: Obama don't step in here
:
: --Previous Message--
: It sounds like the rancher and his son from
: Oregon don't want that Bundy clan from
: Nevada to help them.
:
: --Previous Message--
: OREGON
: Armed protestors occupying national wildlife
: refuge building vow long stay
:
: The 73-year-old rancher and his 46-year-old
: son claim they lit the fires in 2001 and
: 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants
: and protect their property from wildfires.
: The two were convicted of the arsons three
: years ago and served time — the father three
: months, the son one year. But a judge ruled
: their terms were too short under federal law
: and ordered them back to prison for about
: four years each.
:
: The decision has generated controversy in a
: remote part of the state.
:
:
:
:
:
: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/03/armed-protestors-occupying-national-wildlife-refuge-building-vow-long-stay.html?intcmp=hpbt1
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Message Thread
« Back to index | View thread »