Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 19

Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 6

William C. Bond
Pro Se Litigation
P.O. Box 4823
Baltimore, Maryland 21211
443.970.2887
proselitigator@aol.com

Amended on April 7, 2016

February 16, 2016

The Hon. Richard D. Bennett


U.S. District Judge
C/o Clerk of the Court
United States District Court for the District of Maryland
Baltimore Division
101 West Lombard Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21201

RE: Criminal Action No.: 14-0186-RDB-1

Dear Judge Bennett:

I write to you about continuing matters in the above-titled case. While I believe a letter is the
appropriate form for this action, I ask that the court consider the following as movants Third
Motion to Intervene, Motion to Unseal the Third (3rd) Attorney Inquiry Matter & Other Relief
with Expedition Request.

I. The outstanding reconsideration motion

Movant filed a second (2) motion to intervene in this matter on October 19, 2015.1 That same
day, this court granted in part and denied in part movants motion.2 Movant then moved for
reconsideration of that order on October 28, 2015.3

The court has not ruled upon this motion.

II. The third (3) attorney inquiry hearing

1
Please see: Docket no.: 228.
2
Please see: Docket no.: 230.
3
Please see: Docket no.: 245.
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405 Filed 01/24/17 Page 2 of 6

On January 8, 2016, defense counsel moved for an attorney inquiry hearing.4 This hearing was
then held before Judge Sullivan on January 13, 2016.5 The hearing was then continued before
Judge Sullivan on January 27, 2016, and also before this court that same day.6

The court then filed a sealed document that presumably would be its order regarding this
matter.7

A. Continued Knight violations

While the U.S. Fourth Circuit has taken no interest, as of yet, in the First Amendment violations
in this case, that does not mean the court is free to continue to violate the proscriptions recited in
In re Knight Publishing Co., 743 F.2d 231 (4th Cir.1984).

1. For example, the court gave the public zero notice as to the date of the January 13,
2016, hearing and only half a days notice for the dual hearings held on January 27, 2016.

2. The court has given no reason why the telephone conference of January 8, 2016, was
ex parte?

3. The court has given no reason why their sealed document of January 28, 2016,
requires sealing?

4. On information and belief, the court is withholding additional letter(s) to the court
received from defendant Richard Byrd after October 9, 2015. These letter(s) should be
made public.

III. Kenneth W. Ravenell & Billy Murphy

A. Ravenell

Since this court terminated Mr. Ravenell in this case, he has not appeared in any other Maryland
federal court cases, while still appearing in Maryland state courts.8

Clearly, there is some unnamed prohibition against this attorney appearing in Maryland federal
court.

Movant again argues the court not making this reason public is prejudicing the public.

4
While styled as the second such action, in fact, this requested hearing was the third
such action in this case.
5
Please see: Docket no.: 268.
6
Please see: Docket no.: 269 & 270.
7
Please see: Docket no.: 271.
8
Mr. Ravenell did appear in one case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Virginia, which was resolved in 2015.
2
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405 Filed 01/24/17 Page 3 of 6

B. Murphy

Less than two days after the passing of beloved U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia,
Billy Murphy was quoted in The Baltimore Sun as follows:

He was a bigoted and arrogant man of overblown intellect who


first decided the result he wanted and then came up with a rationale
based on his strong political and social views instead of on a
neutral legal analysis, said William H. Billy Murphy, a former
Baltimore judge and veteran attorney whose most recent clients
include the family of Freddie Gray. Time after time, Justice Scalia
voted against the vital interests of working people, labor unions,
blacks, women and gays, who largely despised him, and in favor of
big corporations, wealthy individuals and Republicans, who almost
universally loved him. (Emphasis added.)9

For any attorney to make such a hyperbolic, ad hominem attack against a U.S. judge, alive or
dead, is a gross violation of the Maryland Rules, which this court adopts.10

The Maryland Lawyers Rules of Professional Conduct, Preamble: A Lawyers Responsibilities


specifically speaks to the above direct quote of attorney William H. Billy Murphy for being a
violation of the Rules.

In Part 5 of the Preamble, the Rules say: A lawyer should demonstrate respect for the legal
system and for those who serve it, including judges, other lawyers and public officials.

In Part 6 of the Preamble, the Rules say: In addition, a lawyer should further the public's
understanding of and confidence in the rule of law and the justice system because legal
institutions in a constitutional democracy depend on popular participation and support to
maintain their authority.

These statements by Mr. Murphy are no mere piddlings, but those of a former judge, Maryland
civil rights icon, and, even, the Freddie Gray Family lawyer. He knows well when he speaks in
such a way that he is speaking to his base of mostly ignorant, uneducated, and ill-informed
people, who cannot parse his contemptible communistic politics from actual fact.

Further, his statement was an absolute falsity. Not only is there no known knowledge of Justice
Scalia ever being a bigot, but, in fact, there are many anecdotes pouring out from both the Left
& the Right on what a nice person Justice Scalia was. Attached is just one example, a

9
Please see: Exhibit no.: 1, which can also be viewed here:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/dan-rodricks-blog/bal-billy-murphy-and-other-
attorneys-comment-on-the-scalia-legacy-20160215-story.html
10
Please see: Local Rule 704.
3
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405 Filed 01/24/17 Page 4 of 6

remembrance by a third party of Justice Scalias acts toward a despondent stranger at his
church.11

As far as the rest of Murphys smear, no doubt Texas v. Johnson, Brown v. EMA, Maryland v.
King, Florida v. Jardines, and many, many others all show Justice Scalias strong support for the
First & Fourth Amendments. And I am sure that Mr. Murphy would stand in favor of Justice
Scalias single-handed resurrection of the Confrontation Clause, which he then continued to
defend from any of his fellow justices shoveling fresh dirt upon...12

In sum, not only is Mr. Murphys conduct in the newspaper an utter falsity, it is nonallowed
conduct, even considering the First Amendment, by a member of this courts bar.

This court has the authority under Local Rule 705 to bring Mr. Murphy before the courts
disciplinary authority for wrongly calling Justice Scalia a bigot and impugning his good name
& honorable service to this country.13 It should do so.

IV. Conclusion

The U.S. DOJ allegedly raided the law offices of attorneys Ravenell & Murphy on August 27,
2014.14 This court then terminated Mr. Ravenell as defense counsel in this case on October 10,
2014. Movant has alleged before that, on information and belief, defendant Byrd paid Mr.
Ravenell & Mr. Murphy more than $500,000 for his defense in this case, monies which have not
been returned to Mr. Byrd.

Whether Mr. Byrd is innocent or guilty in this case is of no moment to this action. What is of
moment is that the conduct by Ravenell & Murphy has polluted Mr. Byrds defense, both by
taking his counsel and his counsels fee away, and also because he has no advocate of choice, he
claims he is being sent on a conveyor belt to guilty with no one willing to push the stop
button.15 This court should also wonder if the government is manipulating the timing of their

11
Please see: Exhibit no.: 2, which can also be viewed here: http://fee.org/articles/justice-
scalia-s-great-heart/
12
With inspiration from Antonin Scalia Will Be Remembered as One of the Greats
by Mark Joseph Stern, Slate Magazine, February 13, 2016, which can also be viewed here:
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/02/antonin_scalia_was_a_tr
uly_great_supreme_court_justice.html
13
Amongst other sacrifices, Justice Scalia gave up free college tuition to any school for
his nine children funded in whole by the University of Chicago when he accepted a seat on the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Please see: Exhibit no.: 3, Justice Scalias
famous letter-to-the-editor of Legal Times, which can also be viewed here:
http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/scalia_letter_2000.pdf
14
Please see: Exhibit no.: 4, which can also be viewed here:
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2014-08-27/news/bal-federal-agents-spotted-at-one-south-street-
20140827_1_federal-agents-irs-agent-investment-banking
15
Mr. Byrds exact quote is:
4
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405 Filed 01/24/17 Page 5 of 6

grand jury investigation into Mr. Ravenells termination issues in order to continue to deny Mr.
Byrd the fair fight he so desperately wants.16

And where is Mr. Murphy? Here, a now penniless, black, Jamaican alleged drug dealer is in
trouble by the man. Mr. Murphys answer to actually helping someone whom he had a clear
duty to help is: silence. This conduct exhibits exactly the lack of clarity to conviction and phony
bromides Justice Scalia would have spat upon.

This court must unseal the heart of the wrong in this case: why Ravenell (& Murphys firm) was
terminated from this case, why their law firm was raided, and why the fee Mr. Byrd paid in full
cannot be used to hire new counsel of choice.

If the court is waiting for the government to act, all this movant can say, again, is that mouthing
the words grand jury is not some magic lamp the government can rub to create malingering and
obfuscating smoke so as to obtain a tactical advantage against Mr. Byrd.17

Movant asks for an immediate ruling on these matters.

Thank you very much for your consideration.18

Very truly & respectfully yours,

/s/

William C. Bond

cc: James G. Warwick, AUSA USAO MD via: Email

"I look at the criminal justice system as a tube or a cylinder type


mass incarceration assembly line where the feds try to shape every
case into a circle to fit down into that cylinder where at the end of
this is prison." (Emphasis added.)
Please see: Exhibit no.: 5, Mr. Byrds letter to the court at docket no.: 243 at page 1,
which can also be viewed here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/287172322/Docket-No-243-US-v-
Byrd-Byrd-Letter-to-Judge-Bennett
16
Movant thinks quite a lot about where are the liberal legalize-marijuana-types when the
folks who allegedly supply the legal drugs they so desire are themselves ensnared in larger
non-legal-distribution prosecutions?
17
This court should also be concerned that in the same office building where the Murphy
firm was raided are many other prominent law firms offices, which have many attorneys, all of
whom talk incessantly about why Ravenell & Murphy were raided, and why no resolution has
come from that raid.
18
As it appears Mr. Byrd has, again, no counsel, movant asks the court to have the
USMS serve Mr. Byrd a copy of this filing immediately and note on the docket that it was so
done.
5
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405 Filed 01/24/17 Page 6 of 6

Kenneth Sutherland Clark, AUSA USAO MD via: Email

6
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 4

Billy Murphy, other attorneys


comment on the Scalia legacy
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 2 of 4

He was a bigoted and arrogant man of overblown intellect who first decided the result he wanted
and then came up with a rationale based on his strong political and social views instead of on a
neutral legal analysis, said William H. Billy Murphy, a former Baltimore judge and veteran
attorney whose most recent clients include the family of Freddie Gray. Time after time, Justice
Scalia voted against the vital interests of working people, labor unions, blacks, women and gays, who
largely despised him, and in favor of big corporations, wealthy individuals and Republicans, who
almost universally loved him.

I solicited comments on Scalia from Murphy and other attorneys, one a retired judge and long-time
Republican, the day after the 79-year-old justice died in Texas.

While many commentators have called Scalia a giant of conservatism and some have proclaimed
him the most influential justice of the last quarter-century, my sampling came up with dissenting
opinions.

Justice Scalia was a fraud in his creation of the concept that the court's opinions were to be guided
solely by the original thinking of the authors of the Constitution, said Dan Clements, a long-time
Maryland attorney active in Democratic politics and a former president of the Maryland Trial
Lawyers Association, now the Maryland Association for Justice.
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 3 of 4
John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, as two of the primary developers of the Constitution, were of
the clear view that the Constitution was a temporary document which would need serious
amendment or replacement every 20 or 30 years, as the times dictated. Scalia used his position to be
perhaps the biggest judicial activist on the Supreme Court in decades all the while making
hypocritical comments condemning other justices activism.

Charles G. Bernstein, a former federal public defender and retired judge of Baltimore Circuit Court,
appreciated Scalias wit and intelligence, but believes his opinion in a landmark gun-control case
was something horrible for our country.

Thats a reference to Scalias majority opinion in the landmark Heller decision (2008), which struck
down, by a 5-4 vote, provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 and asserted that
the Second Amendment guaranteed individuals a constitutional right to own and possess handguns
for self-defense. The ruling led two years later to theMcDonald decision, which struck down
Chicagos gun-control laws.

Heller and McDonald accelerated challenges to many other state and local laws that restrict the
possession and carrying of handguns.

He was a great stylist and engaging personality, says Bernstein, a longtime Republican who
switched party affiliations to run for judge of Baltimore's Orphans Court in 2014. "He was protective
of some important liberties such as the right of confrontation and free speech. But his hatchet job on
the opening clause of the 2nd Amendment provides succor to the gun fanatics in our culture and
hinders our continuing problems with gun violence.

The opening clause is, A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state ...
Since we no longer have a militia, the right can be abridged, or reasonably limited. However, rather
than following the basic interpretative rule that all words in a statute or Constitutional provision
must be considered, Scalia negates this opening clause by calling it prefatory, and therefore ignoring
it, thus leaving only the second clause with its right to bear arms language unfettered by the
opening limitation.

This was not a conservative interpretation. It was a radical hatchet job upon the text with
consequences which will continue to cost lives. ... America has handled at least two things badly,
drugs and guns. Heller makes it that more difficult to fix our gun problems.
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-1 Filed 01/24/17 Page 4 of 4
Supreme Court historian Melvin Urofsky, who lives in Gaithersburg, told me in a podcast interview
last fall that Scalias proclivity for acerbic comments and personal attacks in dissents were found to
have trickled down to lower courts, where some judges have embraced Scalia-like rhetoric.

The problem is, its fine that Scalia impresses us with turning a phrase but in terms of how that will
affect future court decisions, it has very little impact, noted Urofsky, author of Dissent and the
Supreme Court: Its Role in the Court's History and the Nation's Constitutional Dialogue. Most
dissents took years before they had any effect [on the court]. If Scalias dissents are to have any
impact at all, its not going to be through Twitter and its not going to be through contemporary
newspaper accounts. Its going to be because these issues are going to come up again and if Scalias
dissents are intellectually powerful enough, they will have an impact. If not, they will be forgotten.

Urofsky considers Scalia a failure in terms of what his appointment to the Supreme Court promised
nearly 30 years ago.

In 1986, when he was appointed by Ronald Reagan, conservatives were overjoyed, Urofsky said.
They were finally going to get someone with the brains to be able to oppose William Brennan, who,
although in a minority on the Rehnquist court, was still able to pull together majority decisions.
They were finally going to get someone who would be the Brennan of the right.

While Scalia has had impact, it hasnt been the kind of impact conservatives were looking for ... He
was essentially the William O. Douglas of the right. He dissented and didnt care if anybody joined
with him. Douglas was not interested in building coalitions, and often Douglas said, The only soul I
have to save is my own.

That, said Urofsky, was essentially Scalia.

Del. Sandy Rosenberg, a Baltimore Democrat and big-time Orioles fan, has a blog post today about
his relationship with Scalia, developed in annual trips to Camden Yards and to the Supreme Court.
"His original intent philosophy extended to baseball," Rosenberg writes. "He was not a fan of the
designated hitter."

Copyright 2016, The Baltimore Sun


Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-2 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 2

Justice
Justice Scalias Great Heart
May God rest his soul
Jeffrey Tucker

Saturday, February 13, 2016

Some of Justice Antonin Scalias decisions I agreed with and some I disagreed with. But Ive never once
doubted the sincerity of his beliefs.

Now that he is gone from this earth, I can tell a story Ive held inside for many years, a scene that touched
me deeply and profoundly. I cannot think of him without remembering this moment.

It was a spring afternoon some years ago, and he was attending church services, sitting in a back pew,
holding his prayer book in his hands. The Mass had ended and most people had gone. He was still saying
prayers, alone in the back pew.

He finally got up and began to walk out. There were no reporters, nobody watching. There was only a
woman who had been attending the same services. She had no idea who he was. I was a bystander, and
Im certain he didnt know I was there.

What was a bit unusual about this woman: she had lashing sores on her face and hands. They were open
sores. There was some disease, and not just physically. She behaved strangely, a troubled person that you
meet in large cities and quickly walk away from. A person to avoid and certainly never touch.

For whatever reason, she walked up to Justice Scalia, who was alone. He took her hands, though they
were full of sores. She leaned in to say something, and she began to cry.

He held her face next to his, and she talked beneath her tears that were now streaming down his suit. He
didnt flinch. He didnt try to get away. He just held her while she spoke. This lasted for perhaps more
than 5 minutes. He closed his eyes while she she spoke, gripping her back with his hand.

He didnt recoil. He stood there with conviction. And love.

There were no cameras and no other onlookers besides myself, and he had no idea I was there.
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-2 Filed 01/24/17 Page 2 of 2

Finally she was finished. What he said comforted her, and she gained composure. She pulled away, ready
to go. He held her rough, sore-filled hands and had a few final words that I could not hear. He gave her
some money.

And then she walked away.

And then he walked away, across the green grass, toward the Supreme Court building, alone. He was
probably preparing for an afternoon of work.

I stood there in awe. Here we have one of Washingtons most powerful men, a star by any standard.
Cameras followed him all over. That kind of attention can get to you in time, you might begin to
believe that your life is a performance.

Not in Justice Scalias case. What I saw that day was a humble man, a compassionate man, a man who
believed in the power of personal contact. This was the action of a man of true principle and character. In
that action, he sought no credit and sought no attention. He was merely doing a humane and beautiful
thing.

A theme in his career was human freedom. Scalia believed in it. And why? Because he thought
humanity could generate better outcomes than all the planning and all the power ever mustered by the
central state. This was a principle he lived.

Ive not told this story until now, simply because Ive long known that he never sought public recognition
for his charity. Charity is simply a form of love, and genuine love does not seek out public recognition.

With this one action, he touched not only her life but mine too. I can only imagine how many other
examples his friends could name.

This was a good man. It is so rare for a man of this quality to gain the high level of influence and power
that he did in his lifetime.

Lord Acton had a dictum that power tends to corrupt. What I saw that day was the rare exception. Power
did not corrupt this man. He remained true to himself and true to his principles.

How unusual: a public figure in his position he never stopped being a good, even great, person.

May his beautiful soul now rest in Gods loving care.


Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-3 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document 405-4 Filed 01/24/17 Page 1 of 1
Case
Case1:14-cr-00186-RDB
1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document
Document405-5
243 Filed
Filed10/26/15
01/24/17 Page
Page11ofof55
Case
Case1:14-cr-00186-RDB
1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document
Document405-5
243 Filed
Filed10/26/15
01/24/17 Page
Page22ofof55
Case
Case1:14-cr-00186-RDB
1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document
Document405-5
243 Filed
Filed10/26/15
01/24/17 Page
Page33ofof55
Case
Case1:14-cr-00186-RDB
1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document
Document405-5
243 Filed
Filed10/26/15
01/24/17 Page
Page44ofof55
Case
Case1:14-cr-00186-RDB
1:14-cr-00186-RDB Document
Document405-5
243 Filed
Filed10/26/15
01/24/17 Page
Page55ofof55

Вам также может понравиться