The 'Hutaree Militia' Case Starts To Unravel — On First Amendment Grounds

When the nine members of the Hutaree militia group were arrested in late March near Adrian, Michigan, the MSM ran hard with the story. Within 48 hours, the template was set: A “right-wing extremist Christian” militia group had been planning to wreak havoc by killing law enforcement officers as a way to engage a wider war against the government.

Soon the MSM had the Hutarees tried, convicted and jailed.

Throughout most of April, the story faded from the news and left behind the public assumption that the Hutarees’ diabolical plot had been thwarted by the FBI in the nick of time.

Then, at an April 27 court hearing concerning the group’s disposition as they awaited trial, the lead FBI agent in the case against the Hutarees was called to testify before U.S. District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. That’s when, according to the Detroit News, the government’s case started showing some serious cracks;

A federal judge had harsh words for prosecutors Tuesday after an FBI agent called to testify in the Hutaree militia case told the court she learned she would take the stand only shortly before the hearing began.

Special Agent Leslie Larsen, the agent in charge of the case in which nine people are accused of plotting to kill police officers and wage war against the U.S. government, did not know the answers to many of the questions she was asked and did not have her notes with her.

“I share the frustration of the defense … with all of the responses that are coming from this witness that she doesn’t know anything,” said U.S. District Judge Victoria A. Roberts.

A few days later, the fissures in the government’s case against the Hutarees widened when, on May 3, Judge Roberts ordered the release on bond of the nine members of the Hutarees, over the objections of federal prosecutors. In her 36-page ruling, Roberts wrote:

The Government relies on the seriousness of the charges as well, to argue that Defendants must be held without bond, because they present a danger to the community. While the Government argues that the Defendants are also a flight risk, its reasons are not persuasive. Importantly, the Court’s Pretrial Services Agency concludes that the Defendants do not present such a risk. Dangerousness then, is the Court’s major concern in assessing whether Defendants should be released on bond.

While the Government contends that the crimes charged against Defendants go well beyond speech, there is no doubt that controversial, offensive and hate-filled speech is implicated. In their defense, the Defendants disagree that this case implicates anything other than speech, and, that whatever they said, did not amount to a conspiracy to commit illegal acts…

The United States is correct that it need not wait until people are killed before it arrests conspirators. But, the Defendants are also correct: their right to engage in hate-filled, venomous speech is a right that deserves First Amendment protection...

The Court reviewed all exhibits, testimony, and proffers, and finds that each Defendant produced sufficient evidence to rebut the presumption in favor of detention. The Government fails to persuade the Court, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there are no conditions that will reasonably assure the Defendants’ appearance in Court as required. The Government also fails to persuade the Court by clear and convincing evidence, that there are no conditions that will reasonably assure the safety of the community, if Defendants are released.

The release has been delayed until 5 p.m. tomorrow pending a possible government motion whether to appeal the ruling.

So, the nine members of group profiled by the Department of Justice and the MSM as representing an imminent right-wing extremist danger have been released on bond by a judge who surveyed the evidence and concluded that the government hadn’t made the case that the Hutarees represented a clear and present danger to “the safety of the community.” Instead, they appear to be most guilty of shooting off their mouths – a practice still protected, in most cases, by the First Amendment.

Here’s the question the MSM needs to ask, but won’t: Was this flamboyant raid primarily driven by political rather than law enforcement motives?

Was the arrest of the Hutaree militia Attorney General Eric Holder’s effort to manufacture an imminent right-wing extremist threat for political purposes?

Just asking.