Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 1 of 14

Oct. 12, 2016

Witness intimidation by the court.

My name is Todd Bethell, owner/operator of FAST Scanning, San Diego CA. Ammon Bundy put
out the call in several of his interviews for experts in land records, maps and document
management to come to the refuge to help process the large numbers of records that indicated
corruption or abuse of power by the BLM. I was still at the refuge as late as lam on Jan
27th observing and recording many important events. What I believed would be useful and
unique testimony on behalf of Ammon, Shawna, David Fry, and other defendants.
Unfortunately, it is now imploding due to government intimidation of Shawna Cox and myself.
The government does not want the jury to know that there was a document/evidence
preservation effort. Shawna has been told by the government and even her own standby
counsel that even if she is found innocent of the main charges that the government can and will
follow up with charges of theft of government records (when she only made copies of them).
This would clearly be a 5th amendment violation, but this did not stop government from reimprisoning the Hammonds a year after they completed their sentences. Shawna is scared. On
Tuesday 11 Oct. I received a call from attorney Nell Brown appointed by Judge Anna Brown (no
relation) telling me that "I've been asked by the Judge in the Malheur case to talk to witnesses
who might need attorneys, people who've been called by the defense as witnesses who might
have exposure, meaning they might be facing criminal charges of their own, if they testify,
depending on what they say ... ". Yes, I and my family and Shawna Cox are intimidated and
scared. Today, I asked for a little time to consult with Ammon's attorney Marcus Mumford
because it appeared my testimony and video evidence was being so narrowed it helps only the
government. Around 2:30pm today, it appears to me that two people working for Shawna's
standby government attorney (Typhanny Tucker and Steve Wilson) decided that my testimony
was no longer needed. Thus, yanking the rug out from the other defendants who probably
don't even know I exist. I simply refuse to have words put into my mouth, to be manipulated or
threatened into helping the government. I will testify only to the facts ... the 'whole truth' one
way or another. More to come.

Respectfully,
Todd Bethell, CFM, MBA
toddbethell@fastscanning.com
949-394-5932

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 2 of 14

Cox Todd Bethell intvw notes

101116
949-394-5932

Todd reviewed and commented on the following govt exhibits:

1-yes, recognize the layout. Visited multiple buildings including main office, bunkhouse, the
"guard house" by the RV bathroom, and peeked into the fire house w the trucks. Worked in the
administration building that had the visitor center.

80-no

82-no
97-main office

104-think that's admin building where I worked

112-no

113-no

115-no

153-looked into building on left, some people were set up to sleep in there, don't know who

224-that's all my stuff. That's my scanner, my workstation, my toolbox, the files were all the
ones I was getting ready to scan. The red folder marked maps.

Summary of intvw:

Shawna visited with me 2x, left to go to meeting in John day and never came back

Some of the documents were very old, I told Shawna how careful we had to be. Said I would
train volunteers how to properly handle them to prevent damage. Shawna agreed.

I was there because Ammon had posted a video asking for scanners and for people who were
experts in document mgmt. and in maps

I'm 18 year Navy vet

I was at the main gate when the Navy Seal came. We had a fire up there. Me, Duane Ehmer,
Travis. It was dark. A fake reporter came up to the campsite but didn't ask any questions. Then
this guy came said he was a Navy Seal. I didn't believe he was a Seal. He was acting wrong. He
was acting like wacked out Vietnam Vet. He said his rank was E18. There is no E18. There were
also voices shouting around us, didn't know if it was our guys or the FBI. All these things made
me nervous. It was chaos, didn't know what was happening.

The Navy Seal was fake. I knew he was fake. The reporter was fake. I though both were sent by
the govt. I made fun of him. He didn't make me nervous on his own but combined with all the
other things I was nervous.

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 3 of 14

Jason Patrick came up to get the Navy Seal and brought him down to the chow hall. There was
an announcement on the radio that there was a meeting in the chow hall. Some people left but I
stayed. The people never came back from the chow hall meeting. That made me nervous. There
was no communication.

Jason Patrick got on the radio and said FBI told him anybody who wants to leave can do so in
next five minutes. I saw some trucks getting ready to drive out. I got my truck started. I had to
leave things behind. My truck battery was at the chow hall. I followed the guys in the trucks.
They turned left and I followed. They were going real fast and turned around when they got to
the roadblock

I have a video of the Navy Seal telling Sean Anderson that rescue was on the way, just hang on,
guys are coming to get you out.

There weren't enough radios, there was no organization, we didn't know what was going on. If I
hadn't heard Jason Patrick say there was a five minute window to leave I could have been stuck
there .

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Order
0

Witness
First
Todd

Witness Last
Name
Bethel

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 4 of 14

Purpose

Government's Position

Court's Response

Was at refuge on Jan.

26, present for arrival of
''Navy Seals," Can
identify men in David
Fry live feed exhibit as
the same men claiming

Court ruled on Tuesday that

this testimony is not relevant based
on the same proffer and further
argument by the defense.

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:

We believe Wampler's postarrest statements to law

enforcement are irrelevant,
self-serving and not admissible
under FRE 803(3). Gov't will file
response to ECF 1402.

Testimony is stlll under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu
David Blanchard. (testifying by

Court has previously ruled that

this testimony is inadmissible. We
agree with the Court that a
stipulation that the governor's
office did not respond to the redress
of grievances would be appropriate.

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu.
Brett Brownscombe and Heidi
Moward. Subject to an updated proffer

1.

Todd Bethel for the reasons

previously stated on the record.

+- L- 11.T--.-. C"--1- -+ +t..-

David

Blanchard

Via Phone: Arresting

officer for Wampler, See
Dkt. 1402 Mot in
Limine and prior proffer

r.

Brett

Brownscombe

Updated proffer
forthcoming

telephone per the parties' agreement):

The Court is unable to determine from
the chart the extent to which Mr.
Blanchard's testimony is admissible and
relevant. The Court is awaiting the
government's responsive filing to
Docket No. 1402. In the meantime, the
parties should plan to call Mr. Blanchard
to make an offer of proof on the record
and as to which the Court may make
rulings as objections are made

as to Mr. Brownscombe, the Court will

only permit a stipulation that Governor
Brown's office did not respond to
Defendants' "Redress of Grievances."

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Charmaign Edwards

Rusty

Hammond

Diane

Holthaus

Document 1439-1

Attended Refuge
seminar, will testify that
she
helped organize seminar
in Fields, OR.
Witnessed his adverse
possession teachings.
Will testify that
Ammon taught it at
both of the seminars she
attended. Can testify
having heard the
"armed militia" mantra.
Saw this wasn't close to
the truth. Can testify
that Federal
government closed
several federal agencies
completely unrelated to
FWS and BLM such as
ACS. Was present at
Sheriff Ward "raise
Updated Declaration
forthcoming: Will
testify
that his family was
threatened, and that
Ammon was also told
his life was also being
See Dkt. 1402.

Filed 10/13/16

Page 5 of 14

Cumulative and hearsay as to

Ammon Bundy's seminars which
were played for the jury and
Ammon Bundy testified to them.
Cumulative as to peaceful nature of
refuge (multiple witnesses). Has no
basis of knowledge as to federal
government closures and not
relevant if unrelated to occupation.
Would also open door to basis for
other closures .. Kim Rollins and
Linsay Tyler have previously
testified about the hand raising
meeting. Linsay Tyler called
it the "trick vote." Irrelevant as to
what she learned from Ammon
Bundy and its efficacy.

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:

2.

Charmaign Edwards because

her testimony is excluded as unduly
cumulative.

The government objects to this

witness for reasons consistent with
the Court's ruling on
10/6/16.

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu
Rusty Hammond. Updated
Declaration still to be proffered for
review

Further testimony about

Wampler's state of mind and his
role as a cook is cumulative to
Louis Smith,

Diane Holthaus. The Court previously

indicated Ms. Maxfield's proffers of "Neil
Wampler" evidence may proceed
subject to objection that particular

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Ryan

Huber

Rebecca

Kingen

Claud R.

Koerber

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 6 of 14

Janalee Tobias, Terry Linell

and Ken Medenbach.
Provided bid for flooring! Not relevant. Prior to trial, the
at refuge. Was asked to government noted that the cost of
provide a similar bid
repairs to the refuge would not be at
for smilar work two
issue. This would open the door to
years before the
the costs of~:iised by th~
occupation took
opcu.e_ation__,.
place. During walk
Visited Refuge on Jan. 7 Hearsay as to Ryan Bundy's
with her family and
unspecified statements. Cumulative
friends. Will testify of
to multiple witnesses as to
her son's interview
condition of refuge and presence of
with Ryan Bundy
press. Cumulative as to Ammon
about his plan at the
Bundy's statements regarding
Refuge. Will testify as
adverse possession. Absence of
to presence of many
discussions about federal
vehicles around
employees at Refuge has been
Refuge, lots of press
offered through numerous
coming and going.
witnesses. Testimony about Adrian
Will testify that she
Sewell is hearsay and was
listened to presentation previously described by Jeannette
by Ammon at Refuge
Finicum. Testimony about other
on Adverse
meetings is cumulative or
Possession. Went back irrelevant.
again to Refuge to
1----

...:I--.!-~

{"'t _____

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:
3.
Ryan Huber because the proffer
is relevant only to restitution issues
which are not before the jury.

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu.
Rebecca Kingen. The Court need
more specific explanation as to the noncumulative, admissible parts of Ms.
Kingen's proposed testimony

11

Will testify regarding

discussions via phone
and
at Refuge during
occupation re: adverse
possession with Ryan
Bundy, Ammon

Hearsay as to defendants'
statements. Cumulative if offered
for state of mind. Argumentative as
to distinguishing from
Medenbach's testimony. Will lead
to confusion under Rule

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:
Claud R. Koerber because the Court
sustains each of the government's
stated objections {except as to the
potential conflict as the Court assumes

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 7 of 14

403. Potential conflict due to

fact that Mr. Mumford represented
Mr. Koerber in D- UT Case No.
2:09-CR-00302- JNP
~\\'.

Melissa

Laughter

Sherriff

Mack

Spent time with Shawna Phil Lewis has advised the

Cox at refuge. Never
government that Ms. Laughter will
saw Shawna Cox with
assert her Fifth Amendment
gun
privilege.
Constitutional Sheriff,
Should be disqualified under Q
background, his
the Court's ruling. Has viewed
conversations with
multiple days of testimony from
Ammon, his
courtroom 13A. His proffered
conversations with
testimony is not relevant, it is
Ammon in Hamey
cumulative and calls for hearsay.
County including a

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:
Melissa Laughter assuming she
exercises her Fifth Amendment privilege
Witnesses whose testimony the
Court will not permit:
Sheriff Mack because the Court
sustains each of the government's
stated objections.

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR
Will testify as to
Dec. 15 meeting
where Ammon
was present and
expressed intent.
Will also testify
corroborating
Ammon's role as
he described it,
specifically based
upon her having
attended several
meetings between
Dec. 16 and Jan. 1
led by others, Will
testify that those
putting on the
meetings did not
appear to be acting
in concert with nor
on behalf of
Ammon. She will
testify that those at
the Refuge were
behaving in ways
that she observed

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 8 of 14

Erin

Maupin

Mark

McConnell To testify as to when No objection.

Mark McConnell - no objection
he became a
government
informant and as to
. Testimony is still under consideration argument 9:00
Mcintosh
Motion to be filed.
Court has previously ruled
Thu
Angus Mcintosh. Although the Court stands by its
that
previous rulings, it will, of course, consider any new filing as
this testimony is inadmissible.

Cumulative. Three committee

of safety members have
testified (Melodi Molt,
Travis Williams, and Chris
Briels) about the December
5, 2015 meeting. Meetings
that occurred between
December
16 and January 1 are
cumulative. Ammon Bundy
attending public meetings,
coming and going to and
from Refuge, and
"militarization" of Burns are
cumulative.
Victoria Sharp's statements
are hearsay.

Testimony is still under consideration argument 9:00

Thu Erin Maupin. The Court needs additional information
to evaluate whether the proposed testimony as to meetings
between 12/15 and 1/1 are unduly cumulative. The Court
sustains the government's stated objections to the
remainder of the proffer.

... ~-~ .. ~l'~

Angus

to this witness

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Heidi

Moaward

Jason

Patrick

Timmy

Puckett

Duane

Schrock

Document 1439-1

State of Oregon, Gov.

Office, will testify as to
communication from
Govemer's office re:
Bums and occupation.
Can testify as to why
Gov. office and other
state employees did not
respond
Petitioner
for
to
Will testify that
government informations
were
colluding to report
false information
inlcuding false
[Needs to testify via
Phone] the Bundys had
permission to cut the
fence, the fence was a
part of a stretch that
was m1ssmg many
His work with Ammon
during last week of
occupation including
Ammon's plans for
Adverse Possession;
Committee of Safety
taking over Refuge;
Ammon's plans for

Filed 10/13/16

Page 9 of 14

Court has previously ruled that

this testimony is inadmissible. We
agree with the Court that a
stipulation that the governor's
office did not respond to the redress
of grievances would be appropriate.

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu.
Brett Brownscombe and Heidi
Moward. Subject to an updated proffer
as to Mr. Brownscombe, the Court will
only permit a stipulation that Governor
Brown's office did not respond to
Defendants' "Redress of Grievances."

Object to basis of knowledge

regarding identity of government
informants, what they may have
reported to the FBI and calls for
speculation regarding collusion.

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu.
Angus Mcintosh. Although the Court
stands by its previous rulings, it will, of
course, consider any new filing as to
this witness

The government objects to

testimony via Skype. Jury needs to
assess demeanor of live witness.
Fence testimony is irrelevant as it
is undisputed that USFWS owns
the fence.
Testimony regarding Ammon
Bundy's plans are cumulative.
Committee of Safety members,
Melodi Molt, Travis Williams, and
Chris Briels previously testified as
to the committee's efforts regarding
the occupation.

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:

7.
Timmy Puckett because the
Court sustains each of the government's
stated objections.
Witnesses whose testimony the
Court will not permit:
Duane Schrock because the Court
sustains each of the government's
stated objections

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Matt

Shea

Ed

Snipes

See Dkt. 1402.

Chuck

Stephenson

Expert:
Provide
foundation
from which
Defendant's can argue
depitction
that
of
firearms and how they
are being handled and
does
not
carried
constitute objectively
intended or threat.

Travis

Welter

Relevance and scope

letter forthcoming.

WA Legislator, attended
Burns meetings and he
attended Refuge, and
will testify what Ammon
~

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 10 of 14

Cumulative and calls for

hearsay. Michele Fiore and
Ammon Bundy testified about
legislator visits .

Witnesses whose testimony the

Court will not permit:
Matt Shea because the Court sustains
each of the government's stated

Further testimony about the

January 2, 2016 parade is
cumulative. Testimony about
Ammon Bundy's statements are
cumulative. Absence of
discussions regarding Refuge
employees are cumulative to
numerous defense witnesses.
Wampler's statements are
cumulative to Janalee Tobias'
testimony.
The Court has expressly ruled
that Stephenson can testify
"regarding the extent to which
various actions with a firearm can
be considered threatening or
nonthreatening from the
perspective of the person handling
the firearm." The government
objects to Stephenson testifying
about government exhibits under
704(b)

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu
Ed Snipes. The Court needs to hear
specific, additional argument as to this
proposal.

Mr. Kimball's inability to

identify Mr. Wampler is not
relevant. It does not refute any fact
at issue and is hearsay offered for
the truth of the matter asserted. The
proffer

Testimony is still under

consideration argument 9:00 Thu
Travis Welter. The Court needs to
have the forthcoming proffer.

Chuck Stephenson may testify

consistent with the Court's previous
ruling, but he may not offer any opinion
as to whether particular photographic
depictions subjectively or objectively
show the presence or absence of an
intended threat. His testimony is limited
to standardized training as to the safe
ways to "carry" a firearm. The rest is for
argument.

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

regarding Exhibits 206, 207

and 212 is insufficient to
evaluate its relevance.

Page 11 of 14

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 12 of 14

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
)
Plaintiff;
)
Case no. 3:16-cr-00051-BR-7
)
Vs.
EYE WITNESS JAMES J. O'HAGAN'S
Shawna Cox, et all
)
AMICUS CURRIE (FRIEND OF THE
)
COURT BRIEF)
Defendant
)
BY AFFADAVIT OF JAMES J. O'HAGAN

_____________

14
15

I JAMES J. O'HAGAN make this declaration of my own free will. If I were called, and

16

sworn to testify, I am competent to testify of my own personal knowledge regarding

17

the following:

18

On October, 11, 2016 I was called by defendant Shawna Cox to testify to the jury in

19

her defense. I have prepared this friend of the court Brief for the Jury, and it is my wish

20

and desire that it is provided to the Jury and not withheld from the Jury, as I would

21

consider it would be further tampering with evidence and further tampering with a

22

witness, which, was done with me when I was prevented to testify openly and

23

honestly in Shawna's and the rest of the Bundy defendants defense.

24

With this document I am reporting and accusing the Prosecution and Judge Anna

25

Brown with the crimes of Tampering with a Witness, intimidating a Witness,

26

Concealing and Tampering with Exculpatory Evidence.

27

In preparing to testify in Shawna Cox's defense Shawna and I collected 5 documents

28

of evidence and Shawna prepared questions for me to identify the documents,

29

authenticate the documents and testify to the relativity of the documents. I have

30

attached copies of the first two documents hereto for the jury to examine. Prior to

31

allowing me taking the witness stand, Judge Anna Brown determined that she was not

32

going to allow me to present any of the evidence I had or testify about any of the

33

evidence I documented as an eye witness to the events that were unfolding on the

34

Malheur when I was there during the occupation.

1

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

1
2

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 13 of 14

As I testified, prior to meeting Shawna Cox at the Malheur on January 6th 2016, I
had never met Shawna Cox before nor any of the other individuals at the Malheur.
I went to the Malheur because I was involved in multiple fraud schemes in the

Federal Courts in Oregon by officers of our courts who used our courts to execute their

personal fraud schemes. I reported these fraud crimes to the FBI in Portland Oregon

who informed me that it would not do them any good to investigate fraud crimes by

officers of the courts because no prosecutor would prosecute one of his fellow State

Bar members for using the courts to execute their fraud crimes. With this knowledge

passed onto me I understood that the Bar Association's had overthrown the peoples

10

courts and was using the peoples courts for their personal gains, and when I learned of

11

the Hammonds situation I felt it was necessary to expose the magnitude of corruption

12

that has infected and sickened our judicial branches. The illness of our courts was

13

documented in the Anti Government Movement Guide Book published by the National

14

Center for State Courts in 1999, and supports my testimony.

15

The Anti-Government Movement Guide Book was the first exhibit I was to testify

16

about. Judge Anna Brown refused to allow any testimony regarding a government

17

document that advised our courts to clean up their criminal acts and stop using our

18

courts for organized crimes of their fellow Bar Association members. I intended to

19

testify of how the judicial industry of the State and Federal Bar Associations had

20

perverted justice.

21

Exhibit 2, was a document that I personally wrote while I was at the Malheur

22

documenting the events that were unfolding while I was there witnessing them. The

23

document is dated the day I personally served it on the parties that I addressed the

24

document to by personal service that was witnessed by a third party. The date of the

25

document is essential as the document itself was dated a considerable amount of time

26

before any charges were brought against Shawna Cox or any of the other Bundy

27

Defendants and as such, since I am not psychic, I had no way of knowing what criminal

28

charges the government would bring against the Bundy defendants nor the arguments

29

that would be made to support the governments charges. As it shows in the

Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR

Document 1439-1

Filed 10/13/16

Page 14 of 14

document I simply documented the events unfolding while I was there, offered a civil

resolution to the problem and identified certain criminal codes that were being

violated and would be violated if any one was injured or killed and the government did

not follow the laws established by the people.

The moment one reads the document it is obvious why the government

prosecutors fought against Shawna Cox from allowing the jury to examine the

document, as it is exculpatory evidence they had in their possession at all times that

defeated all of their arguments and criminal charges, and the moment the prosecutors

learned of the document they should've dropped their charges and focused their

10

11

prosecution on the criminal codes the other aggressors had violated.

As a friend of the court who is motivated to do what I can to restore our Domestic

12

Tranquility that is in much need of restoring, I am asking the Jury to carefully evaluate

13

these documents and determine my testimony regarding these documents is needed

14

in order to determine the truth and warrant a finding of guilt or innocence. I am also

15

asking the Jury to indict each and every one involved in preventing me from testify to

16

the events that I documented that were unfolding on the Malheur while I was there

17

witnessing the events, on tampering with a witness and intimidating and preventing a

18

witness to testify on behalf of the defendants.

19

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct; except as to

20

those things, I say on information and belief and as to those things, I believe them to

21

be true also.

22
23

24
25

Dated this 12th day of October 2016.

By~~~~~~~~~~~

James J. O'Hagan, All Rights and Protections Reserved