EXCLUSIVE: 'Redress of grievance' notice delivered to local Oregon officials on behalf of rancher and son believed to be wrongly sentenced

Tuesday, December 15, 2015 by: J. D. Heyes
Tags: Hammond Ranch, redress of grievances, unlawful actions

---

(NaturalNews) Several groups have delivered a "Redress of Grievance" document to local officials in Oregon in an attempt to have them intervene on behalf of a local rancher and his son who are set to return to prison on federal charges of "terrorist" arson.

As Natural News reported exclusively, Dwight Hammond, 73, and his son Steven Hammond, 46, were convicted in 2012 under a federal anti-terrorism statute, of committing arson on federal land overseen by the Bureau of Land Management. Both were charged in connection with a 2001 fire, and Steven in connection with another fire in 2006. Though the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 calls for a minimum sentence of five years in prison, U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan, now retired, gave them lighter sentences because he did not believe they had shown malicious intent.

Federal prosecutors appealed Hogan's three-month sentence for Dwight Hammond and one-year sentence for Steven Hammond – which both served – because they were far short of the minimum. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed, and ordered them re-sentenced in October, which they were.

'Redress'

Now, as the date approaches for the Hammonds to begin their sentences, patriot groups and other concerned citizens are demanding that local officials reexamine evidence they say exculpates the men.

"After extensive research on the Hammond case, We the People of these States United have reason to believe that Dwight and Steven Hammond were not afforded their rights to due process as protected by the United States Constitution," begins the redress, which was sent to Sheriff David Ward, Commissioner Dan Nichols, Commissioner Pete Runnels, Justice of the Peace Donna Thomas, District Attorney Tim Colahan, Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum and Gov. Kate Brown.

"We have principled evidence that Dwight and Steven Hammond committed no crime in the act of performing the prescribed burn and back fire, that the U.S. Government does not have authority to enforce Territorial law under article four within the State of Oregon, and that the County of Harney and State of Oregon failed to protect the Hammond's rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. USC 42.1986, 18.242, 18.121, 42.1983, 42.1985," the redress says.

In particular:

-- "We hold compelling evidence that the U.S. Government abused the federal court system, situating the Hammond family into duress as effort to force the Hammond's to sell their Steen Mountain property to a federal agency."

-- "We have substantial evidence that the U.S. Attorney's Office exploited an act of Congress, imposing cruel and unusual punishment upon residents of Harney County."

-- "We hold substantial evidence that inside the borders of Harney County the U.S. Government is acting outside the authority enumerated in the Constitution of the United States."

-- "We secure evidence that the U.S. Attorney's Office independently prepared the indictment against Dwight & Steven Hammond, and that the Grand Jury did not properly assemble or investigate before the indictment. We have no evidence to believe that the Grand Jury participated in the indictment altogether."

-- "We have sure evidence that U.S. Congress does not have authority to legislate minimum sentences, requiring Dwight and Steven Hammond to serve five years in a federal penitentiary."

-- "We hold confirming video evidence of federal agents exhibiting a culture of intimidation toward individuals and businesses within the borders of Harney County. That federal agent, by fire destroy private property, and that the Hammond family are being denied the same protection of the laws that are enjoyed by federal agents."

Multiple constitutional usurpations

The group says that the mandatory minimum sentence of five years is a violation of the Eighth Amendment's protection against "cruel and unusual" punishment, and that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals violated the Fifth Amendment's protection against double jeopardy, by ordering the Hammonds re-sentenced for the same crime.

"In a commitment to expose the truth and administrate justice, We the People of these States United insist that you immediately assemble an independent Evidential Hearing Board (EHB) comprised of the people of Harney County in accordance with Common Law principals," the document says. "That the Evidential Hearing Board call witnesses and investigate each of these allegations publicly."

As of the time of publication, it was unclear if any of the public officials served had responded.

Source:

Redress of Grievance document^[PDF]